↓ Skip to main content

The best practice for microbiome analysis using R

Overview of attention for article published in Protein & Cell, May 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 823)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
353 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
167 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The best practice for microbiome analysis using R
Published in
Protein & Cell, May 2023
DOI 10.1093/procel/pwad024
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tao Wen, Guoqing Niu, Tong Chen, Qirong Shen, Jun Yuan, Yong-Xin Liu

Abstract

With the gradual maturity of sequencing technology, many microbiome studies have published, driving the emergence and advance of related analysis tools. R language is the widely used platform for microbiome data analysis for powerful functions. However, tens of thousands of R packages and numerous similar analysis tools have brought major challenges for many researchers to explore microbiome data. How to choose suitable, efficient, convenient, and easy-to-learn tools from the numerous R packages has become a problem for many microbiome researchers. We have organized 324 common R packages for microbiome analysis and classified them according to application categories (diversity, difference, biomarker, correlation and network, functional prediction, and others), which could help researchers quickly find relevant R packages for microbiome analysis. Furthermore, we systematically sorted the integrated R packages (phyloseq, microbiome, MicrobiomeAnalystR, Animalcules, microeco, and amplicon) for microbiome analysis, and summarized the advantages and limitations, which will help researchers choose the appropriate tools. Finally, we thoroughly reviewed the R packages for microbiome analysis, summarized most of the common analysis content in the microbiome, and formed the most suitable pipeline for microbiome analysis. This paper is accompanied by hundreds of examples with 10,000 lines codes in GitHub, which can help beginners to learn, also help analysts compare and test different tools. This paper systematically sorts the application of R in microbiome, providing an important theoretical basis and practical reference for the development of better microbiome tools in the future. All the code is available at GitHub.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 353 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 167 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 14%
Researcher 22 13%
Student > Master 14 8%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Unspecified 8 5%
Other 30 18%
Unknown 57 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 19%
Environmental Science 8 5%
Unspecified 8 5%
Engineering 5 3%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 57 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 202. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2024.
All research outputs
#198,221
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Protein & Cell
#9
of 823 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,881
of 410,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Protein & Cell
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 823 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 410,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.