The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inferring Correlation Networks from Genomic Survey Data
Open accessAbstract
High-throughput sequencing based techniques, such as 16S rRNA gene profiling, have the potential to elucidate the complex inner workings of natural microbial communities - be they from the world's oceans or the human gut. A key step in exploring such data is the identification of dependencies between members of these communities, which is commonly achieved by correlation analysis. However, it has been known since the days of Karl Pearson that the analysis of the type of data generated by such techniques (referred to as compositional data) can produce unreliable results since the observed data take the form of relative fractions of genes or species, rather than their absolute abundances. Using simulated and real data from the Human Microbiome Project, we show that such compositional effects can be widespread and severe: in some real data sets many of the correlations among taxa can be artifactual, and true correlations may even appear with opposite sign. Additionally, we show that community diversity is the key factor that modulates the acuteness of such compositional effects, and develop a new approach, called SparCC (available at https://bitbucket.org/yonatanf/sparcc), which is capable of estimating correlation values from compositional data. To illustrate a potential application of SparCC, we infer a rich ecological network connecting hundreds of interacting species across 18 sites on the human body. Using the SparCC network as a reference, we estimated that the standard approach yields 3 spurious species-species interactions for each true interaction and misses 60% of the true interactions in the human microbiome data, and, as predicted, most of the erroneous links are found in the samples with the lowest diversity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment
Hunter, J. D. (2007) · Computing in Science & Engineering · doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 · Cited by 39,249
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2003) · doi:10.1201/9780429258480 · Cited by 27,276
Exploring Network Structure, Dynamics, and Function Using NetworkX
Hagberg, A. A., Schult, D. A., & Swart, P. J. (2008) · Proceedings of the Python in Science Conference · doi:10.25080/tcwv9851 · Cited by 7,477
Python for scientific computing
Oliphant, T. E. (2007) · Computing in Science & Engineering · doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.58 · Cited by 3,303 · cited 1×
“All analysis and procedures were implemented in Python, utilizing the Numpy [29] and Networkx [30] modules.”
MethodA framework for human microbiome research
The Human Microbiome Project Consortium (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11209 · Cited by 2,650
Reducing the Effects of PCR Amplification and Sequencing Artifacts on 16S rRNA-Based Studies
Schloss, P. D., Gevers, D., & Westcott, S. L. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027310 · Cited by 2,112
Ironing out the wrinkles in the rare biosphere through improved OTU clustering
Huse, S. M., Welch, D. M., Morrison, H. G., & Sogin, M. L. (2010) · Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1462-2920.2010.02193.x · Cited by 1,346
Compositional Data Analysis: Theory and Applications
(2011) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119976462 · Cited by 704 · cited 3×
“…between ratios whose numerators and denominators contain common parts’’ [11], and since that time it has been shown that many other standard analysis techniques are invalid when applied to such compositional data, and that their interpretation is unreliable and often misleading [10], [12], [13].”
BackgroundMethodEvaluation of 16S rDNA-Based Community Profiling for Human Microbiome Research
Jumpstart Consortium Human Microbiome Project Data Generation Working Group (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0039315 · Cited by 297
Cited by
Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome
David, L. A., Maurice, C. F., Carmody, R. N., Gootenberg, D. B., Button, J. E., Wolfe, B. E., Ling, A. V., Devlin, A. S., Varma, Y., Fischbach, M. A., et al. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12820 · Cited by 10,100
Microbiome Datasets Are Compositional: And This Is Not Optional
Gloor, G. B., Macklaim, J. M., Pawlowsky-Glahn, V., & Egozcue, J. J. (2017) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2017.02224 · Cited by 3,044
“There are several more rigorous approaches that can be applied to analyze correlation in microbiome datasets, including SPARCC (Friedman and Alm, 2012) and SPieCeasi (Kurtz et al., 2015), both of which assume a sparse data matrix, and the φ (Lovell et al., 2015) and ρ (Erb andNotredame, 2016)metrics (the published ver…”
BackgroundInfluentialShotgun metagenomics, from sampling to analysis
Quince, C., Walker, A. W., Simpson, J. T., Loman, N. J., & Segata, N. (2017) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3935 · Cited by 2,202
Best practices for analysing microbiomes
Knight, R., Vrbanac, A., Taylor, B. C., Aksenov, A., Callewaert, C., Debelius, J., Gonzalez, A., Kosciolek, T., McCall, L.-I., McDonald, D., et al. (2018) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41579-018-0029-9 · Cited by 2,030
Analysis of composition of microbiomes: a novel method for studying microbial composition
Mandal, S., Van Treuren, W., White, R. A., Eggesbø, M., Knight, R., & Peddada, S. D. (2015) · Microbial Ecology in Health & Disease · doi:10.3402/mehd.v26.27663 · Cited by 1,942
Metadata
- Authors
- Friedman, J., & Alm, E. J.
- Venue
- PLoS Computational Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2012-09-20
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- e1002687
- ISSN
- 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
- 1553-7358
- OpenAlex
- W2113977541
- Cited by
- 2,706
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 13.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Inferring Correlation Networks from Genomic Survey Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002687
- The paper
- Friedman, J., & Alm, E. J. (2012). Inferring Correlation Networks from Genomic Survey Data. PLoS Computational Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002687
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.