Two reports examine the sources of variation in methods for analyzing microbial communities.
References
Cho, I. & Blaser, M.J. Nat. Rev. Genet. 13, 260–270 (2012).
Alivisatos, A.P. et al. Science 350, 507–508 (2015).
Costea, P.I. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3960 (2017).
Sinha, R. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3981 (2017).
Goodrich, J.K. et al. Cell 158, 250–262 (2014).
Gohl, D.M. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 942–949 (2016).
Jones, M.B. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 14024–14029 (2015).
Salter, S.J. et al. BMC Biol. 12, 87 (2014).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
D.M.G. is a shareholder and CSO of CoreBiome, Inc.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gohl, D. The ecological landscape of microbiome science. Nat Biotechnol 35, 1047–1049 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3983
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3983
- Springer Nature America, Inc.
This article is cited by
-
Comparison of DNA extraction methods for 16S rRNA gene sequencing in the analysis of the human gut microbiome
Scientific Reports (2023)
-
Wild primate microbiomes prevent weight gain in germ-free mice
Animal Microbiome (2020)
-
Filling the gap between collection, transport and storage of the human gut microbiota
Scientific Reports (2019)