Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36538837›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in plant biology2023

Compositionality, sparsity, spurious heterogeneity, and other data-driven challenges for machine learning algorithms within plant microbiome studies.

Sebastiano Busato, Max Gordon, Meenal Chaudhari, Ib Jensen, Turgut Akyol, Stig Andersen, Cranos Williams

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in plant biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Graph Neural Network-Based Approaches for Protein Function Prediction.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sebastiano BusatoDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA; NC Plant Sciences Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA.
Max GordonDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA; NC Plant Sciences Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA.
Meenal ChaudhariDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA; NC Plant Sciences Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA.
Ib JensenDepartment of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Turgut AkyolDepartment of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Stig AndersenDepartment of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Cranos WilliamsDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA; NC Plant Sciences Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA; Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA. Electronic address: cmwilli5@ncsu.edu.

Funding

Molecular Biotechnology Training at North Carolina State UniversityT32GM008776 · NIGMS · NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY RALEIGH · PI KELLY, ROBERT M · 2000 to 2019
$3.9M
NC STATE MOLECULAR BIOTECHNOLOGY TRAINING PROGRAM (MBTP)T32GM133366 · NIGMS · NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY RALEIGH · PI Jason M. Haugh, Robert M Kelly · 2020 to 2026
$3.3M
Natural variation and systems-level properties of gene regulation in DrosophilaR01HD093041 · NICHD · TEXAS ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION · PI REEVES, GREGORY T · 2017 to 2021
$1.5M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD093041NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM008776NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM133366
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The plant-associated microbiome is a key component of plant systems, contributing to their health, growth, and productivity. The application of machine learning (ML) in this field promises to help untangle the relationships involved. However, measurements of microbial communities by high-throughput sequencing pose challenges for ML. Noise from low sample sizes, soil heterogeneity, and technical factors can impact the performance of ML. Additionally, the compositional and sparse nature of these datasets can impact the predictive accuracy of ML. We review recent literature from plant studies to illustrate that these properties often go unmentioned. We expand our analysis to other fields to quantify the degree to which mitigation approaches improve the performance of ML and describe the mathematical basis for this. With the advent of accessible analytical packages for microbiome data including learning models, researchers must be familiar with the nature of their datasets.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaAlgorithmsMachine LearningPlantsCompositional data analysisDeep learningMachine learningPlant-associated microbiome

Identifiers

PMID36538837
PMCPMC9925409

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.