Author
Emily K. Cope
Other affiliations: University of California, San Francisco, Translational Genomics Research Institute
Bio: Emily K. Cope is an academic researcher from Northern Arizona University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Microbiome & Dysbiosis. The author has an hindex of 16, co-authored 42 publications receiving 4973 citations. Previous affiliations of Emily K. Cope include University of California, San Francisco & Translational Genomics Research Institute.
Topics: Microbiome, Dysbiosis, Medicine, Gut flora, Disease
Papers
More filters
Northern Arizona University1, National Institutes of Health2, University of Minnesota3, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution4, University of California, Davis5, Massachusetts Institute of Technology6, University of Copenhagen7, University of Trento8, Chinese Academy of Sciences9, University of California, San Francisco10, University of Pennsylvania11, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory12, North Carolina State University13, University of California, San Diego14, Institute for Systems Biology15, Dalhousie University16, University of British Columbia17, Statens Serum Institut18, Anschutz Medical Campus19, University of Washington20, Michigan State University21, Stanford University22, Broad Institute23, Harvard University24, Australian National University25, University of Düsseldorf26, University of New South Wales27, Sookmyung Women's University28, San Diego State University29, Howard Hughes Medical Institute30, Cornell University31, Max Planck Society32, Colorado State University33, Google34, Syracuse University35, Webster University36, United States Department of Agriculture37, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences38, Colorado School of Mines39, University of Southern Mississippi40, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration41, University of California, Merced42, Wageningen University and Research Centre43, University of Arizona44, Environment Agency45, University of Florida46, Merck & Co.47
TL;DR: QIIME 2 development was primarily funded by NSF Awards 1565100 to J.G.C. and R.K.P. and partial support was also provided by the following: grants NIH U54CA143925 and U54MD012388.
Abstract: QIIME 2 development was primarily funded by NSF Awards 1565100 to J.G.C. and 1565057 to R.K. Partial support was also provided by the following: grants NIH U54CA143925 (J.G.C. and T.P.) and U54MD012388 (J.G.C. and T.P.); grants from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (J.G.C. and R.K.); ERCSTG project MetaPG (N.S.); the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences QYZDB-SSW-SMC021 (Y.B.); the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council APP1085372 (G.A.H., J.G.C., Von Bing Yap and R.K.); the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) to D.L.G.; and the State of Arizona Technology and Research Initiative Fund (TRIF), administered by the Arizona Board of Regents, through Northern Arizona University. All NCI coauthors were supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute. S.M.G. and C. Diener were supported by the Washington Research Foundation Distinguished Investigator Award.
8,821 citations
Northern Arizona University1, University of Minnesota2, University of California, Davis3, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution4, Massachusetts Institute of Technology5, University of Copenhagen6, University of Trento7, Chinese Academy of Sciences8, University of California, San Francisco9, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia10, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory11, North Carolina State University12, University of Montana13, Dalhousie University14, University of British Columbia15, Shedd Aquarium16, University of Colorado Denver17, University of California, San Diego18, Michigan State University19, Stanford University20, Harvard University21, Broad Institute22, Australian National University23, University of Düsseldorf24, Sookmyung Women's University25, San Diego State University26, Howard Hughes Medical Institute27, Cornell University28, Max Planck Society29, University of Washington30, Colorado State University31, Google32, Syracuse University33, Webster University34, United States Department of Agriculture35, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences36, Colorado School of Mines37, University of Southern Mississippi38, Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory39, University of California, Merced40, Wageningen University and Research Centre41, University of Arizona42, Environment Agency43, University of Florida44, Merck & Co.45
TL;DR: QIIME 2 provides new features that will drive the next generation of microbiome research, including interactive spatial and temporal analysis and visualization tools, support for metabolomics and shotgun metagenomics analysis, and automated data provenance tracking to ensure reproducible, transparent microbiome data science.
Abstract: We present QIIME 2, an open-source microbiome data science platform accessible to users spanning the microbiome research ecosystem, from scientists and engineers to clinicians and policy makers. QIIME 2 provides new features that will drive the next generation of microbiome research. These include interactive spatial and temporal analysis and visualization tools, support for metabolomics and shotgun metagenomics analysis, and automated data provenance tracking to ensure reproducible, transparent microbiome data science.
875 citations
Northern Arizona University1, National Institutes of Health2, University of Minnesota3, University of California, Davis4, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution5, Massachusetts Institute of Technology6, University of Copenhagen7, University of Trento8, Chinese Academy of Sciences9, University of California, San Francisco10, University of Pennsylvania11, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory12, North Carolina State University13, University of Montana14, Institute for Systems Biology15, Dalhousie University16, University of British Columbia17, Statens Serum Institut18, Anschutz Medical Campus19, University of Washington20, University of California, San Diego21, Michigan State University22, Stanford University23, Harvard University24, Broad Institute25, Australian National University26, University of Düsseldorf27, University of New South Wales28, Sookmyung Women's University29, San Diego State University30, Howard Hughes Medical Institute31, Cornell University32, Max Planck Society33, Colorado State University34, Google35, Syracuse University36, Webster University37, United States Department of Agriculture38, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences39, Colorado School of Mines40, University of Southern Mississippi41, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration42, University of California, Merced43, Wageningen University and Research Centre44, University of Arizona45, Environment Agency46, University of Florida47, Merck & Co.48
TL;DR: An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.
Abstract: In the version of this article initially published, some reference citations were incorrect. The three references to Jupyter Notebooks should have cited Kluyver et al. instead of Gonzalez et al. The reference to Qiita should have cited Gonzalez et al. instead of Schloss et al. The reference to mothur should have cited Schloss et al. instead of McMurdie & Holmes. The reference to phyloseq should have cited McMurdie & Holmes instead of Huber et al. The reference to Bioconductor should have cited Huber et al. instead of Franzosa et al. And the reference to the biobakery suite should have cited Franzosa et al. instead of Kluyver et al. The errors have been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.
301 citations
TL;DR: The four SCCs described here, including their development as NP therapies, show great promise for treating a wide variety of bacterial and fungal pathogens that are not easily killed by routine antimicrobial agents.
Abstract: Methods: MIC, MBC and multidose experiments were conducted against a broad range of bacteria and fungi. Time-release and cytotoxicity studies of the compounds were also carried out. Free SCCs and SCC NPs were tested against a panel of medically important pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MRAB), Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Burkholderia cepacia and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Results: All four SCCs demonstrated strong efficacy in concentration ranges of 0.5 –90 mg/L. Clinical bacterial isolates with high inherent resistance to purified compounds were more effectively treated either with an NP formulation of these compounds or by repeated dosing. Overall, the compounds were active against highly resistant bacterial strains, such as MRSA and MRAB, and were active against the biodefence pathogens Bacillus anthracis and Yersinia pestis. All of the medically important bacterial strains tested play a role in many different infectious diseases. Conclusions: The four SCCs described here, including their development as NP therapies, show great promise for treating a wide variety of bacterial and fungal pathogens that are not easily killed by routine antimicrobial agents.
139 citations
TL;DR: A large proportion of CRS patient heterogeneity may be explained by the composition of their sinus bacterial microbiota and related host immune response—features which may inform strategies for tailored therapy in this patient population.
Abstract: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a heterogeneous disease characterized by persistent sinonasal inflammation and sinus microbiome dysbiosis. The basis of this heterogeneity is poorly understood. We sought to address the hypothesis that a limited number of compositionally distinct pathogenic bacterial microbiota exist in CRS patients and invoke discrete immune responses and clinical phenotypes in CRS patients. Sinus brushings from patients with CRS (n = 59) and healthy individuals (n = 10) collected during endoscopic sinus surgery were analyzed using 16S rRNA gene sequencing, predicted metagenomics, and RNA profiling of the mucosal immune response. We show that CRS patients cluster into distinct sub-groups (DSI-III), each defined by specific pattern of bacterial co-colonization (permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA); p = 0.001, r
2 = 0.318). Each sub-group was typically dominated by a pathogenic family: Streptococcaceae (DSI), Pseudomonadaceae (DSII), Corynebacteriaceae [DSIII(a)], or Staphylococcaceae [DSIII(b)]. Each pathogenic microbiota was predicted to be functionally distinct (PERMANOVA; p = 0.005, r
2 = 0.217) and encode uniquely enriched gene pathways including ansamycin biosynthesis (DSI), tryptophan metabolism (DSII), two-component response [DSIII(b)], and the PPAR-γ signaling pathway [DSIII(a)]. Each is also associated with significantly distinct host immune responses; DSI, II, and III(b) invoked a variety of pro-inflammatory, TH1 responses, while DSIII(a), which exhibited significantly increased incidence of nasal polyps (Fisher’s exact; p = 0.034, relative risk = 2.16), primarily induced IL-5 expression (Kruskal Wallis; q = 0.045). A large proportion of CRS patient heterogeneity may be explained by the composition of their sinus bacterial microbiota and related host immune response—features which may inform strategies for tailored therapy in this patient population.
123 citations
Cited by
More filters
Northern Arizona University1, National Institutes of Health2, University of Minnesota3, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution4, University of California, Davis5, Massachusetts Institute of Technology6, University of Copenhagen7, University of Trento8, Chinese Academy of Sciences9, University of California, San Francisco10, University of Pennsylvania11, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory12, North Carolina State University13, University of California, San Diego14, Institute for Systems Biology15, Dalhousie University16, University of British Columbia17, Statens Serum Institut18, Anschutz Medical Campus19, University of Washington20, Michigan State University21, Stanford University22, Harvard University23, Broad Institute24, Australian National University25, University of Düsseldorf26, University of New South Wales27, Sookmyung Women's University28, San Diego State University29, Howard Hughes Medical Institute30, Max Planck Society31, Cornell University32, Colorado State University33, Google34, Syracuse University35, Webster University36, United States Department of Agriculture37, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences38, Colorado School of Mines39, University of Southern Mississippi40, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration41, University of California, Merced42, Wageningen University and Research Centre43, University of Arizona44, Environment Agency45, University of Florida46, Merck & Co.47
TL;DR: QIIME 2 development was primarily funded by NSF Awards 1565100 to J.G.C. and R.K.P. and partial support was also provided by the following: grants NIH U54CA143925 and U54MD012388.
Abstract: QIIME 2 development was primarily funded by NSF Awards 1565100 to J.G.C. and 1565057 to R.K. Partial support was also provided by the following: grants NIH U54CA143925 (J.G.C. and T.P.) and U54MD012388 (J.G.C. and T.P.); grants from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (J.G.C. and R.K.); ERCSTG project MetaPG (N.S.); the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences QYZDB-SSW-SMC021 (Y.B.); the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council APP1085372 (G.A.H., J.G.C., Von Bing Yap and R.K.); the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) to D.L.G.; and the State of Arizona Technology and Research Initiative Fund (TRIF), administered by the Arizona Board of Regents, through Northern Arizona University. All NCI coauthors were supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute. S.M.G. and C. Diener were supported by the Washington Research Foundation Distinguished Investigator Award.
8,821 citations
TL;DR: Some notable features of IQ-TREE version 2 are described and the key advantages over other software are highlighted.
Abstract: IQ-TREE (http://www.iqtree.org, last accessed February 6, 2020) is a user-friendly and widely used software package for phylogenetic inference using maximum likelihood. Since the release of version 1 in 2014, we have continuously expanded IQ-TREE to integrate a plethora of new models of sequence evolution and efficient computational approaches of phylogenetic inference to deal with genomic data. Here, we describe notable features of IQ-TREE version 2 and highlight the key advantages over other software.
4,337 citations
University of Amsterdam1, Ghent University2, University of Chicago3, University of Pennsylvania4, Lund University5, Auckland City Hospital6, University of Antwerp7, University of New South Wales8, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven9, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust10, Queen's University11, University of Zagreb12, Northwestern University13, Medical University of Łódź14, University of Aberdeen15, Medical University of South Carolina16, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill17, University of Southampton18, University of São Paulo19, National University of Singapore20, Flinders University21
TL;DR: The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012 and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery.
Abstract: The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012. The core objective of the EPOS2020 guideline is to provide revised, up-to-date and clear evidence-based recommendations and integrated care pathways in ARS and CRS. EPOS2020 provides an update on the literature published and studies undertaken in the eight years since the EPOS2012 position paper was published and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery. EPOS2020 also involves new stakeholders, including pharmacists and patients, and addresses new target users who have become more involved in the management and treatment of rhinosinusitis since the publication of the last EPOS document, including pharmacists, nurses, specialised care givers and indeed patients themselves, who employ increasing self-management of their condition using over the counter treatments. The document provides suggestions for future research in this area and offers updated guidance for definitions and outcome measurements in research in different settings. EPOS2020 contains chapters on definitions and classification where we have defined a large number of terms and indicated preferred terms. A new classification of CRS into primary and secondary CRS and further division into localized and diffuse disease, based on anatomic distribution is proposed. There are extensive chapters on epidemiology and predisposing factors, inflammatory mechanisms, (differential) diagnosis of facial pain, allergic rhinitis, genetics, cystic fibrosis, aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, immunodeficiencies, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and the relationship between upper and lower airways. The chapters on paediatric acute and chronic rhinosinusitis are totally rewritten. All available evidence for the management of acute rhinosinusitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps in adults and children is systematically reviewed and integrated care pathways based on the evidence are proposed. Despite considerable increases in the amount of quality publications in recent years, a large number of practical clinical questions remain. It was agreed that the best way to address these was to conduct a Delphi exercise . The results have been integrated into the respective sections. Last but not least, advice for patients and pharmacists and a new list of research needs are included. The full document can be downloaded for free on the website of this journal: http://www.rhinologyjournal.com.
2,853 citations
2,594 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: FastTree as mentioned in this paper uses sequence profiles of internal nodes in the tree to implement neighbor-joining and uses heuristics to quickly identify candidate joins, then uses nearest-neighbor interchanges to reduce the length of the tree.
Abstract: Gene families are growing rapidly, but standard methods for inferring phylogenies do not scale to alignments with over 10,000 sequences. We present FastTree, a method for constructing large phylogenies and for estimating their reliability. Instead of storing a distance matrix, FastTree stores sequence profiles of internal nodes in the tree. FastTree uses these profiles to implement neighbor-joining and uses heuristics to quickly identify candidate joins. FastTree then uses nearest-neighbor interchanges to reduce the length of the tree. For an alignment with N sequences, L sites, and a different characters, a distance matrix requires O(N^2) space and O(N^2 L) time, but FastTree requires just O( NLa + N sqrt(N) ) memory and O( N sqrt(N) log(N) L a ) time. To estimate the tree's reliability, FastTree uses local bootstrapping, which gives another 100-fold speedup over a distance matrix. For example, FastTree computed a tree and support values for 158,022 distinct 16S ribosomal RNAs in 17 hours and 2.4 gigabytes of memory. Just computing pairwise Jukes-Cantor distances and storing them, without inferring a tree or bootstrapping, would require 17 hours and 50 gigabytes of memory. In simulations, FastTree was slightly more accurate than neighbor joining, BIONJ, or FastME; on genuine alignments, FastTree's topologies had higher likelihoods. FastTree is available at http://microbesonline.org/fasttree.
2,436 citations