839 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30189859)
1. Reliability of a participant-friendly fecal collection method for microbiome analyses: a step towards large sample size investigation.
Szopinska JW; Gresse R; van der Marel S; Boekhorst J; Lukovac S; van Swam I; Franke B; Timmerman H; Belzer C; Arias Vasquez A
BMC Microbiol; 2018 Sep; 18(1):110. PubMed ID: 30189859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. High-throughput DNA extraction strategy for fecal microbiome studies.
Isokääntä H; Tomnikov N; Vanhatalo S; Munukka E; Huovinen P; Hakanen AJ; Kallonen T
Microbiol Spectr; 2024 Jun; 12(6):e0293223. PubMed ID: 38747618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of fecal and oral collection methods for studies of the human microbiota in two Iranian cohorts.
Wu Z; Hullings AG; Ghanbari R; Etemadi A; Wan Y; Zhu B; Poustchi H; Fahraji BB; Sakhvidi MJZ; Shi J; Knight R; Malekzadeh R; Sinha R; Vogtmann E
BMC Microbiol; 2021 Nov; 21(1):324. PubMed ID: 34809575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods on Variation in Gut Metagenomics and Untargeted Metabolomics.
Guan H; Pu Y; Liu C; Lou T; Tan S; Kong M; Sun Z; Mei Z; Qi Q; Quan Z; Zhao G; Zheng Y
mSphere; 2021 Oct; 6(5):e0063621. PubMed ID: 34523982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Assessment of the impact of different fecal storage protocols on the microbiota diversity and composition: a pilot study.
Moossavi S; Engen PA; Ghanbari R; Green SJ; Naqib A; Bishehsari F; Merat S; Poustchi H; Keshavarzian A; Malekzadeh R
BMC Microbiol; 2019 Jun; 19(1):145. PubMed ID: 31253096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Storage and handling of human faecal samples affect the gut microbiome composition: A feasibility study.
Ezzy AC; Hagstrom AD; George C; Hamlin AS; Pereg L; Murphy AJ; Winter G
J Microbiol Methods; 2019 Sep; 164():105668. PubMed ID: 31302202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effect of room temperature transport vials on DNA quality and phylogenetic composition of faecal microbiota of elderly adults and infants.
Hill CJ; Brown JR; Lynch DB; Jeffery IB; Ryan CA; Ross RP; Stanton C; O'Toole PW
Microbiome; 2016 May; 4(1):19. PubMed ID: 27160322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods for Microbiome and Metabolomics Studies.
Wang Z; Zolnik CP; Qiu Y; Usyk M; Wang T; Strickler HD; Isasi CR; Kaplan RC; Kurland IJ; Qi Q; Burk RD
Front Cell Infect Microbiol; 2018; 8():301. PubMed ID: 30234027
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Performance comparison of fecal preservative and stock solutions for gut microbiome storage at room temperature.
Park C; Yun KE; Chu JM; Lee JY; Hong CP; Nam YD; Jeong J; Han K; Ahn YJ
J Microbiol; 2020 Aug; 58(8):703-710. PubMed ID: 32583287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantifying technical confounders in microbiome studies.
Bartolomaeus TUP; Birkner T; Bartolomaeus H; Löber U; Avery EG; Mähler A; Weber D; Kochlik B; Balogh A; Wilck N; Boschmann M; Müller DN; Markó L; Forslund SK
Cardiovasc Res; 2021 Feb; 117(3):863-875. PubMed ID: 32374853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Gut microbiome analysis by post: Evaluation of the optimal method to collect stool samples from infants within a national cohort study.
Williams GM; Leary SD; Ajami NJ; Chipper Keating S; Petrosin JF; Hamilton-Shield JP; Gillespie KM
PLoS One; 2019; 14(6):e0216557. PubMed ID: 31188837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Collection of non-meconium stool on fecal occult blood cards is an effective method for fecal microbiota studies in infants.
Wong WSW; Clemency N; Klein E; Provenzano M; Iyer R; Niederhuber JE; Hourigan SK
Microbiome; 2017 Sep; 5(1):114. PubMed ID: 28870234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of Specimen Collection Methodologies and Storage Conditions on the Short-Term Stability of Oral Microbiome Taxonomy.
Luo T; Srinivasan U; Ramadugu K; Shedden KA; Neiswanger K; Trumble E; Li JJ; McNeil DW; Crout RJ; Weyant RJ; Marazita ML; Foxman B
Appl Environ Microbiol; 2016 Sep; 82(18):5519-29. PubMed ID: 27371581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of methods for fecal microbiome biospecimen collection.
Dominianni C; Wu J; Hayes RB; Ahn J
BMC Microbiol; 2014 Apr; 14():103. PubMed ID: 24758293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling.
Short MI; Hudson R; Besasie BD; Reveles KR; Shah DP; Nicholson S; Johnson-Pais TL; Weldon K; Lai Z; Leach RJ; Fongang B; Liss MA
BMC Microbiol; 2021 Jan; 21(1):26. PubMed ID: 33446094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An alternative storage method for characterization of the intestinal microbiota through next generation sequencing.
Ribeiro RM; Souza-Basqueira M; Oliveira LC; Salles FC; Pereira NB; Sabino EC
Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo; 2018 Nov; 60():e77. PubMed ID: 30517247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Method Validation for Extraction of DNA from Human Stool Samples for Downstream Microbiome Analysis.
Neuberger-Castillo L; Hamot G; Marchese M; Sanchez I; Ammerlaan W; Betsou F
Biopreserv Biobank; 2020 Apr; 18(2):102-116. PubMed ID: 31999474
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of a modified phenol/chloroform and commercial-kit methods for extracting DNA from horse fecal material.
Janabi AHD; Kerkhof LJ; McGuinness LR; Biddle AS; McKeever KH
J Microbiol Methods; 2016 Oct; 129():14-19. PubMed ID: 27460337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Fecal Aliquot Straw Technique (FAST) allows for easy and reproducible subsampling: assessing interpersonal variation in trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO) accumulation.
Romano KA; Dill-McFarland KA; Kasahara K; Kerby RL; Vivas EI; Amador-Noguez D; Herd P; Rey FE
Microbiome; 2018 May; 6(1):91. PubMed ID: 29776435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Variations of gut microbiome composition under different preservation solutions and periods].
Duan Y; Lü N; Cai F; Zhu B
Sheng Wu Gong Cheng Xue Bao; 2020 Dec; 36(12):2525-2540. PubMed ID: 33398951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
