↓ Skip to main content

16S Based Microbiome Analysis from Healthy Subjects’ Skin Swabs Stored for Different Storage Periods Reveal Phylum to Genus Level Changes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
16S Based Microbiome Analysis from Healthy Subjects’ Skin Swabs Stored for Different Storage Periods Reveal Phylum to Genus Level Changes
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.02012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ingeborg Klymiuk, Isabella Bambach, Vijaykumar Patra, Slave Trajanoski, Peter Wolf

Abstract

Microbiome research and improvements in high throughput sequencing technologies revolutionize our current scientific viewpoint. The human associated microbiome is a prominent focus of clinical research. Large cohort studies are often required to investigate the human microbiome composition and its changes in a multitude of human diseases. Reproducible analyses of large cohort samples require standardized protocols in study design, sampling, storage, processing, and data analysis. In particular, the effect of sample storage on actual results is critical for reproducibility. So far, the effect of storage conditions on the results of microbial analysis has been examined for only a few human biological materials (e.g., stool samples). There is a lack of data and information on appropriate storage conditions on other human derived samples, such as skin. Here, we analyzed skin swab samples collected from three different body locations (forearm, V of the chest and back) of eight healthy volunteers. The skin swabs were soaked in sterile buffer and total DNA was isolated after freezing at -80°C for 24 h, 90 or 365 days. Hypervariable regions V1-2 were amplified from total DNA and libraries were sequenced on an Illumina MiSeq desktop sequencer in paired end mode. Data were analyzed using Qiime 1.9.1. Summarizing all body locations per time point, we found no significant differences in alpha diversity and multivariate community analysis among the three time points. Considering body locations separately significant differences in the richness of forearm samples were found between d0 vs. d90 and d90 vs. d365. Significant differences in the relative abundance of major skin genera (Propionibacterium, Streptococcus, Bacteroides, Corynebacterium, and Staphylococcus) were detected in our samples in Bacteroides only among all time points in forearm samples and between d0 vs. d90 and d90 vs. d365 in V of the chest and back samples. Accordingly, significant differences were detected in the ratios of the main phyla Actinobacteria, Firmicutes, and Bacteroidetes: Actinobacteria vs. Bacteroidetes at d0 vs. d90 (p-value = 0.0234), at d0 vs. d365 (p-value = 0.0234) and d90 vs. d365 (p-value = 0.0234) in forearm samples and at d90 vs. d365 in V of the chest (p-value = 0.0234) and back samples (p-value = 0.0234). The ratios of Firmicutes vs. Bacteroidetes showed no significant changes in any of the body locations as well as the ratios of Actinobacteria vs. Firmicutes at any time point. Studies with larger sample sizes are required to verify our results and determine long term storage effects with regard to specific biological questions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 119 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 24%
Researcher 20 17%
Student > Master 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 23 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 14 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 12%
Engineering 6 5%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 24 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 20 December 2016.
All research outputs
#3,123,936
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#2,875
of 24,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,242
of 420,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#84
of 407 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,956 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 420,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 407 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.