Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 579

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Design of 16S rRNA gene primers for 454 pyrosequencing of the human foregut microbiome

Open access
Nossa, Carlos W·2010·World Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract

AIM: To design and validate broad-range 16S rRNA primers for use in high throughput sequencing to classify bacteria isolated from the human foregut microbiome. METHODS: A foregut microbiome dataset was constructed using 16S rRNA gene sequences obtained from oral, esophageal, and gastric microbiomes produced by Sanger sequencing in previous studies represented by 219 bacterial species. Candidate primers evaluated were from the European rRNA database. To assess the effect of sequence length on accuracy of classification, 16S rRNA genes of various lengths were created by trimming the full length sequences. Sequences spanning various hypervariable regions were selected to simulate the amplicons that would be obtained using possible primer pairs. The sequences were compared with full length 16S rRNA genes for accuracy in taxonomic classification using online software at the Ribosomal Database Project (RDP). The universality of the primer set was evaluated using the RDP 16S rRNA database which is comprised of 433 306 16S rRNA genes, represented by 36 phyla. RESULTS: Truncation to 100 nucleotides (nt) downstream from the position corresponding to base 28 in the Escherichia coli 16S rRNA gene caused misclassification of 87 (39.7%) of the 219 sequences, compared with misclassification of only 29 (13.2%) sequences with truncation to 350 nt. Among 350-nt sequence reads within various regions of the 16S rRNA gene, the reverse read of an amplicon generated using the 343F/798R primers had the least (8.2%) effect on classification. In comparison, truncation to 900 nt mimicking single pass Sanger reads misclassified 5.0% of the 219 sequences. The 343F/798R amplicon accurately assigned 91.8% of the 219 sequences at the species level. Weighted by abundance of the species in the esophageal dataset, the 343F/798R amplicon yielded similar classification accuracy without a significant loss in species coverage (92%). Modification of the 343F/798R primers to 347F/803R increased their universality among foregut species. Assuming that a typical polymerase chain reaction can tolerate 2 mismatches between a primer and a template, the modified 347F and 803R primers should be able to anneal 98% and 99.6% of all 16S rRNA genes in the RDP database. CONCLUSION: 347F/803R is the most suitable pair of primers for classification of foregut 16S rRNA genes but also possess universality suitable for analyses of other complex microbiomes.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3748/wjg.v16.i33.4135

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 31 references

Cited by

See all 579

Metadata

Authors
Nossa, C. W.
Venue
World Journal of Gastroenterology
Published
2010
Volume
16
Issue
33
Pages
4135
ISSN
1007-9327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2146503791
Cited by
579
References
31
FWCI
5.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Design of 16S rRNA gene primers for 454 pyrosequencing of the human foregut microbiome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3748/wjg.v16.i33.4135
The paper
Nossa, C. W. (2010). Design of 16S rRNA gene primers for 454 pyrosequencing of the human foregut microbiome. World Journal of Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v16.i33.4135

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.