scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Jennifer Fouquier

Bio: Jennifer Fouquier is an academic researcher from Anschutz Medical Campus. The author has contributed to research in topics: Relationship extraction & Information extraction. The author has an hindex of 8, co-authored 16 publications receiving 4480 citations. Previous affiliations of Jennifer Fouquier include Scripps Research Institute & San Diego State University.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Evan Bolyen1, Jai Ram Rideout1, Matthew R. Dillon1, Nicholas A. Bokulich1, Christian C. Abnet2, Gabriel A. Al-Ghalith3, Harriet Alexander4, Harriet Alexander5, Eric J. Alm6, Manimozhiyan Arumugam7, Francesco Asnicar8, Yang Bai9, Jordan E. Bisanz10, Kyle Bittinger11, Asker Daniel Brejnrod7, Colin J. Brislawn12, C. Titus Brown5, Benjamin J. Callahan13, Andrés Mauricio Caraballo-Rodríguez14, John Chase1, Emily K. Cope1, Ricardo Silva14, Christian Diener15, Pieter C. Dorrestein14, Gavin M. Douglas16, Daniel M. Durall17, Claire Duvallet6, Christian F. Edwardson, Madeleine Ernst14, Madeleine Ernst18, Mehrbod Estaki17, Jennifer Fouquier19, Julia M. Gauglitz14, Sean M. Gibbons15, Sean M. Gibbons20, Deanna L. Gibson17, Antonio Gonzalez14, Kestrel Gorlick1, Jiarong Guo21, Benjamin Hillmann3, Susan Holmes22, Hannes Holste14, Curtis Huttenhower23, Curtis Huttenhower24, Gavin A. Huttley25, Stefan Janssen26, Alan K. Jarmusch14, Lingjing Jiang14, Benjamin D. Kaehler25, Benjamin D. Kaehler27, Kyo Bin Kang28, Kyo Bin Kang14, Christopher R. Keefe1, Paul Keim1, Scott T. Kelley29, Dan Knights3, Irina Koester14, Tomasz Kosciolek14, Jorden Kreps1, Morgan G. I. Langille16, Joslynn S. Lee30, Ruth E. Ley31, Ruth E. Ley32, Yong-Xin Liu, Erikka Loftfield2, Catherine A. Lozupone19, Massoud Maher14, Clarisse Marotz14, Bryan D Martin20, Daniel McDonald14, Lauren J. McIver23, Lauren J. McIver24, Alexey V. Melnik14, Jessica L. Metcalf33, Sydney C. Morgan17, Jamie Morton14, Ahmad Turan Naimey1, Jose A. Navas-Molina14, Jose A. Navas-Molina34, Louis-Félix Nothias14, Stephanie B. Orchanian, Talima Pearson1, Samuel L. Peoples20, Samuel L. Peoples35, Daniel Petras14, Mary L. Preuss36, Elmar Pruesse19, Lasse Buur Rasmussen7, Adam R. Rivers37, Michael S. Robeson38, Patrick Rosenthal36, Nicola Segata8, Michael Shaffer19, Arron Shiffer1, Rashmi Sinha2, Se Jin Song14, John R. Spear39, Austin D. Swafford, Luke R. Thompson40, Luke R. Thompson41, Pedro J. Torres29, Pauline Trinh20, Anupriya Tripathi14, Peter J. Turnbaugh10, Sabah Ul-Hasan42, Justin J. J. van der Hooft43, Fernando Vargas, Yoshiki Vázquez-Baeza14, Emily Vogtmann2, Max von Hippel44, William A. Walters32, Yunhu Wan2, Mingxun Wang14, Jonathan Warren45, Kyle C. Weber37, Kyle C. Weber46, Charles H. D. Williamson1, Amy D. Willis20, Zhenjiang Zech Xu14, Jesse R. Zaneveld20, Yilong Zhang47, Qiyun Zhu14, Rob Knight14, J. Gregory Caporaso1 
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

Posted ContentDOI
Evan Bolyen1, Jai Ram Rideout1, Matthew R. Dillon1, Nicholas A. Bokulich1, Christian C. Abnet, Gabriel A. Al-Ghalith2, Harriet Alexander3, Harriet Alexander4, Eric J. Alm5, Manimozhiyan Arumugam6, Francesco Asnicar7, Yang Bai8, Jordan E. Bisanz9, Kyle Bittinger10, Asker Daniel Brejnrod6, Colin J. Brislawn11, C. Titus Brown3, Benjamin J. Callahan12, Andrés Mauricio Caraballo-Rodríguez13, John Chase1, Emily K. Cope1, Ricardo Silva13, Pieter C. Dorrestein13, Gavin M. Douglas14, Daniel M. Durall15, Claire Duvallet5, Christian F. Edwardson16, Madeleine Ernst13, Mehrbod Estaki15, Jennifer Fouquier17, Julia M. Gauglitz13, Deanna L. Gibson15, Antonio Gonzalez18, Kestrel Gorlick1, Jiarong Guo19, Benjamin Hillmann2, Susan Holmes20, Hannes Holste18, Curtis Huttenhower21, Curtis Huttenhower22, Gavin A. Huttley23, Stefan Janssen24, Alan K. Jarmusch13, Lingjing Jiang18, Benjamin D. Kaehler23, Kyo Bin Kang13, Kyo Bin Kang25, Christopher R. Keefe1, Paul Keim1, Scott T. Kelley26, Dan Knights2, Irina Koester13, Irina Koester18, Tomasz Kosciolek18, Jorden Kreps1, Morgan G. I. Langille14, Joslynn S. Lee27, Ruth E. Ley28, Ruth E. Ley29, Yong-Xin Liu8, Erikka Loftfield, Catherine A. Lozupone17, Massoud Maher18, Clarisse Marotz18, Bryan D Martin30, Daniel McDonald18, Lauren J. McIver22, Lauren J. McIver21, Alexey V. Melnik13, Jessica L. Metcalf31, Sydney C. Morgan15, Jamie Morton18, Ahmad Turan Naimey1, Jose A. Navas-Molina32, Jose A. Navas-Molina18, Louis-Félix Nothias13, Stephanie B. Orchanian18, Talima Pearson1, Samuel L. Peoples30, Samuel L. Peoples33, Daniel Petras13, Mary L. Preuss34, Elmar Pruesse17, Lasse Buur Rasmussen6, Adam R. Rivers35, Ii Michael S Robeson36, Patrick Rosenthal34, Nicola Segata7, Michael Shaffer17, Arron Shiffer1, Rashmi Sinha, Se Jin Song18, John R. Spear37, Austin D. Swafford18, Luke R. Thompson38, Luke R. Thompson39, Pedro J. Torres26, Pauline Trinh30, Anupriya Tripathi18, Anupriya Tripathi13, Peter J. Turnbaugh9, Sabah Ul-Hasan40, Justin J. J. van der Hooft41, Fernando Vargas18, Yoshiki Vázquez-Baeza18, Emily Vogtmann, Max von Hippel42, William A. Walters28, Yunhu Wan, Mingxun Wang13, Jonathan Warren43, Kyle C. Weber35, Kyle C. Weber44, Chase Hd Williamson1, Amy D. Willis30, Zhenjiang Zech Xu18, Jesse R. Zaneveld30, Yilong Zhang45, Rob Knight18, J. Gregory Caporaso1 
24 Oct 2018-PeerJ
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

Journal ArticleDOI
Evan Bolyen1, Jai Ram Rideout1, Matthew R. Dillon1, Nicholas A. Bokulich1, Christian C. Abnet2, Gabriel A. Al-Ghalith3, Harriet Alexander4, Harriet Alexander5, Eric J. Alm6, Manimozhiyan Arumugam7, Francesco Asnicar8, Yang Bai9, Jordan E. Bisanz10, Kyle Bittinger11, Asker Daniel Brejnrod7, Colin J. Brislawn12, C. Titus Brown4, Benjamin J. Callahan13, Andrés Mauricio Caraballo-Rodríguez14, John Chase1, Emily K. Cope1, Ricardo Silva14, Christian Diener15, Pieter C. Dorrestein14, Gavin M. Douglas16, Daniel M. Durall17, Claire Duvallet6, Christian F. Edwardson, Madeleine Ernst14, Madeleine Ernst18, Mehrbod Estaki17, Jennifer Fouquier19, Julia M. Gauglitz14, Sean M. Gibbons20, Sean M. Gibbons15, Deanna L. Gibson17, Antonio Gonzalez21, Kestrel Gorlick1, Jiarong Guo22, Benjamin Hillmann3, Susan Holmes23, Hannes Holste21, Curtis Huttenhower24, Curtis Huttenhower25, Gavin A. Huttley26, Stefan Janssen27, Alan K. Jarmusch14, Lingjing Jiang21, Benjamin D. Kaehler28, Benjamin D. Kaehler26, Kyo Bin Kang29, Kyo Bin Kang14, Christopher R. Keefe1, Paul Keim1, Scott T. Kelley30, Dan Knights3, Irina Koester14, Irina Koester21, Tomasz Kosciolek21, Jorden Kreps1, Morgan G. I. Langille16, Joslynn S. Lee31, Ruth E. Ley32, Ruth E. Ley33, Yong-Xin Liu, Erikka Loftfield2, Catherine A. Lozupone19, Massoud Maher21, Clarisse Marotz21, Bryan D Martin20, Daniel McDonald21, Lauren J. McIver24, Lauren J. McIver25, Alexey V. Melnik14, Jessica L. Metcalf34, Sydney C. Morgan17, Jamie Morton21, Ahmad Turan Naimey1, Jose A. Navas-Molina21, Jose A. Navas-Molina35, Louis-Félix Nothias14, Stephanie B. Orchanian, Talima Pearson1, Samuel L. Peoples20, Samuel L. Peoples36, Daniel Petras14, Mary L. Preuss37, Elmar Pruesse19, Lasse Buur Rasmussen7, Adam R. Rivers38, Michael S. Robeson39, Patrick Rosenthal37, Nicola Segata8, Michael Shaffer19, Arron Shiffer1, Rashmi Sinha2, Se Jin Song21, John R. Spear40, Austin D. Swafford, Luke R. Thompson41, Luke R. Thompson42, Pedro J. Torres30, Pauline Trinh20, Anupriya Tripathi14, Anupriya Tripathi21, Peter J. Turnbaugh10, Sabah Ul-Hasan43, Justin J. J. van der Hooft44, Fernando Vargas, Yoshiki Vázquez-Baeza21, Emily Vogtmann2, Max von Hippel45, William A. Walters32, Yunhu Wan2, Mingxun Wang14, Jonathan Warren46, Kyle C. Weber38, Kyle C. Weber47, Charles H. D. Williamson1, Amy D. Willis20, Zhenjiang Zech Xu21, Jesse R. Zaneveld20, Yilong Zhang48, Qiyun Zhu21, Rob Knight21, J. Gregory Caporaso1 
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

Journal ArticleDOI
26 Apr 2016
TL;DR: A study on the impacts of geography, material type, human interaction, location in a room, seasonal variation, and indoor and microenvironmental parameters on bacterial communities in offices finds that offices have city-specific bacterial communities, such that it can accurately predict which city an office microbiome sample is derived from, but office- specific bacterial communities are less apparent.
Abstract: In the United States, humans spend the majority of their time indoors, where they are exposed to the microbiome of the built environment (BE) they inhabit. Despite the ubiquity of microbes in BEs and their potential impacts on health and building materials, basic questions about the microbiology of these environments remain unanswered. We present a study on the impacts of geography, material type, human interaction, location in a room, seasonal variation, and indoor and microenvironmental parameters on bacterial communities in offices. Our data elucidate several important features of microbial communities in BEs. First, under normal office environmental conditions, bacterial communities do not differ on the basis of surface material (e.g., ceiling tile or carpet) but do differ on the basis of the location in a room (e.g., ceiling or floor), two features that are often conflated but that we are able to separate here. We suspect that previous work showing differences in bacterial composition with surface material was likely detecting differences based on different usage patterns. Next, we find that offices have city-specific bacterial communities, such that we can accurately predict which city an office microbiome sample is derived from, but office-specific bacterial communities are less apparent. This differs from previous work, which has suggested office-specific compositions of bacterial communities. We again suspect that the difference from prior work arises from different usage patterns. As has been previously shown, we observe that human skin contributes heavily to the composition of BE surfaces. IMPORTANCE Our study highlights several points that should impact the design of future studies of the microbiology of BEs. First, projects tracking changes in BE bacterial communities should focus sampling efforts on surveying different locations in offices and in different cities but not necessarily different materials or different offices in the same city. Next, disturbance due to repeated sampling, though detectable, is small compared to that due to other variables, opening up a range of longitudinal study designs in the BE. Next, studies requiring more samples than can be sequenced on a single sequencing run (which is increasingly common) must control for run effects by including some of the same samples in all of the sequencing runs as technical replicates. Finally, detailed tracking of indoor and material environment covariates is likely not essential for BE microbiome studies, as the normal range of indoor environmental conditions is likely not large enough to impact bacterial communities.

122 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Despite late-successional dominance by skin- and outdoor-associated bacteria, the most ubiquitous organisms were predominantly gut-associated taxa, which persisted following exclusion of humans, suggesting that bacterial hosts are mostly dormant on BE surfaces.
Abstract: Human-associated bacteria dominate the built environment (BE). Following decontamination of floors, toilet seats, and soap dispensers in four public restrooms, in situ bacterial communities were characterized hourly, daily, and weekly to determine their successional ecology. The viability of cultivable bacteria, following the removal of dispersal agents (humans), was also assessed hourly. A late-successional community developed within 5 to 8 h on restroom floors and showed remarkable stability over weeks to months. Despite late-successional dominance by skin- and outdoor-associated bacteria, the most ubiquitous organisms were predominantly gut-associated taxa, which persisted following exclusion of humans. Staphylococcus represented the majority of the cultivable community, even after several hours of human exclusion. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-associated virulence genes were found on floors but were not present in assembled Staphylococcus pan-genomes. Viral abundances, which were predominantly enterophages, human papilloma virus, and herpesviruses, were significantly correlated with bacterial abundances and showed an unexpectedly low virus-to-bacterium ratio in surface-associated samples, suggesting that bacterial hosts are mostly dormant on BE surfaces.

92 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
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

Journal ArticleDOI

3,734 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

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The use of eDNA metabarcoding for surveying animal and plant richness, and the challenges in using eDNA approaches to estimate relative abundance are reviewed, which distill what is known about the ability of different eDNA sample types to approximate richness in space and across time.
Abstract: The genomic revolution has fundamentally changed how we survey biodiversity on earth. High-throughput sequencing ("HTS") platforms now enable the rapid sequencing of DNA from diverse kinds of environmental samples (termed "environmental DNA" or "eDNA"). Coupling HTS with our ability to associate sequences from eDNA with a taxonomic name is called "eDNA metabarcoding" and offers a powerful molecular tool capable of noninvasively surveying species richness from many ecosystems. Here, we review the use of eDNA metabarcoding for surveying animal and plant richness, and the challenges in using eDNA approaches to estimate relative abundance. We highlight eDNA applications in freshwater, marine and terrestrial environments, and in this broad context, we distill what is known about the ability of different eDNA sample types to approximate richness in space and across time. We provide guiding questions for study design and discuss the eDNA metabarcoding workflow with a focus on primers and library preparation methods. We additionally discuss important criteria for consideration of bioinformatic filtering of data sets, with recommendations for increasing transparency. Finally, looking to the future, we discuss emerging applications of eDNA metabarcoding in ecology, conservation, invasion biology, biomonitoring, and how eDNA metabarcoding can empower citizen science and biodiversity education.

1,038 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This Review focuses on recent findings that suggest that operational taxonomic unit-based analyses should be replaced with new methods that are based on exact sequence variants, methods for integrating metagenomic and metabolomic data, and issues surrounding compositional data analysis.
Abstract: Complex microbial communities shape the dynamics of various environments, ranging from the mammalian gastrointestinal tract to the soil. Advances in DNA sequencing technologies and data analysis have provided drastic improvements in microbiome analyses, for example, in taxonomic resolution, false discovery rate control and other properties, over earlier methods. In this Review, we discuss the best practices for performing a microbiome study, including experimental design, choice of molecular analysis technology, methods for data analysis and the integration of multiple omics data sets. We focus on recent findings that suggest that operational taxonomic unit-based analyses should be replaced with new methods that are based on exact sequence variants, methods for integrating metagenomic and metabolomic data, and issues surrounding compositional data analysis, where advances have been particularly rapid. We note that although some of these approaches are new, it is important to keep sight of the classic issues that arise during experimental design and relate to research reproducibility. We describe how keeping these issues in mind allows researchers to obtain more insight from their microbiome data sets.

992 citations