Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Mar;6(2):10.1128/microbiolspec.emf-0015-2018.
doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.EMF-0015-2018.

Future Technologies

Affiliations
Review

Future Technologies

Raúl J Cano et al. Microbiol Spectr. 2018 Mar.

Abstract

Microbiome analysis of environmental samples may represent the next frontier in environmental microbial forensics. Next-generation sequencing technologies significantly increased the available genetic data that could be used as evidentiary material. It is not clear, however, whether the microbiome can scale across institutions using forensic-based evidence due to the data resource requirements and the associated costs of maintaining these databases. A successful microbiome study is impacted by the quality of the information gathered and the steps in sample processing and data analysis. To ascertain the validity of methods and the results obtained, there needs to be a stringent procedure to validate the methods and ensure that the results are comparable and reproducible, not only within the laboratory but also between laboratories conducting similar research. Of primary importance for meaningful microbiome studies is an experimental design that leads to carefully executed, controlled, and reproducible studies. The microbiome literature contains a fair share of anecdotal descriptions of microbial community composition and "diagnostic" relative abundance of the taxa therein. These studies are now being supplemented by experimental designs that feature repeated measurements, error estimates, correlations of microbiota with covariates, and increasingly sophisticated statistical tests that enhance the robustness of data analysis and study conclusions. It is imperative to be careful, especially when carrying out attribution studies, to be fully aware of the possible biases included in a specific sample being analyzed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Technical factors in microbiome research that influence results and conclusions.

References

    1. Metcalf JL, Xu ZZ, Bouslimani A, Dorrestein P, Carter DO, Knight R. 2017. Microbiome tools for forensic science. Trends Biotechnol 35:814–823. [PubMed] - PubMed
    1. Stämmler F, Gläsner J, Hiergeist A, Holler E, Weber D, Oefner PJ, Gessner A, Spang R. 2016. Adjusting microbiome profiles for differences in microbial load by spike-in bacteria. Microbiome 4:28. [PubMed] - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gorzelak MA, Gill SK, Tasnim N, Ahmadi-Vand Z, Jay M, Gibson DL. 2015. Methods for improving human gut microbiome data by reducing variability through sample processing and storage of stool. PLoS One 10:e0134802. [PubMed] - PMC - PubMed
    1. Goodrich JK, Di Rienzi SC, Poole AC, Koren O, Walters WA, Caporaso JG, Knight R, Ley RE. 2014. Conducting a microbiome study. Cell 158:250–262. [PubMed] - PMC - PubMed
    1. La Rosa PS, Brooks JP, Deych E, Boone EL, Edwards DJ, Wang Q, Sodergren E, Weinstock G, Shannon WD. 2012. Hypothesis testing and power calculations for taxonomic-based human microbiome data. PLoS One 7:e52078. [PubMed] - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources