Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Toward Standards in Clinical Microbiota Studies: Comparison of Three DNA Extraction Methods and Two Bioinformatic Pipelines

10 Feb 2020

Abstract excerpt

Method choice throughout the workflow of a microbiome study, from sample collection to DNA extraction and sequencing procedures, can greatly affect results. This study evaluated three different DNA extraction methods and two bioinformatic pipelines by including positive and negative controls and various biological specimens. By identifying an optimal combination of DNA extraction method and bioinformatic pipeline...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Share to Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Gut microbiota and health

Source

Identifiers

PMID: 32047058
DOI: 10.1128/msystems.00547-19

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 8 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Toward Standards in Clinical Microbiota Studies: Comparison of Three DNA Extraction Methods and Two Bioinformatic PipelinesPMID 32047058Read ↗

Toward standards in clinical microbiome studies: comparison of three DNA extraction methods and two bioinformatic pipelinesSemantic proximity Read ↗

DNA extraction for human microbiome studies: the issue of standardizationSemantic proximity Read ↗

Validation and standardization of DNA extraction and library construction methods for metagenomics-based human fecal microbiome measurementsSemantic proximity Read ↗

Evaluation of fecal DNA extraction protocols for human gut microbiome studiesSemantic proximity Read ↗

The Impact of DNA Extraction Methods on Stool Bacterial and Fungal Microbiota Community RecoverySemantic proximity Read ↗

Choice of DNA extraction method affects stool microbiome recovery and subsequent phenotypic association analysesSemantic proximity Read ↗

Comparison of DNA extraction methods for 16S rRNA gene sequencing in the analysis of the human gut microbiomeSemantic proximity Read ↗

Gut Microbiota Analysis Results Are Highly Dependent on the 16S rRNA Gene Target Region, Whereas the Impact of DNA Extraction Is MinorSemantic proximity Read ↗

Choice of DNA extraction method affects stool microbiome recovery and subsequent phenotypic association analysesSemantic proximity Read ↗

A Comparison of Three Automated Nucleic Acid Extraction Systems for Human Stool SamplesSemantic proximity Read ↗

Determination of the Optimal Bacterial DNA Extraction Method to Explore the Urinary MicrobiotaSemantic proximity Read ↗

Assessment of fecal DNA extraction protocols for metagenomic studiesSemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.