Author
Sydney C. Morgan
Other affiliations: University of Adelaide, University of California, San Diego
Bio: Sydney C. Morgan is an academic researcher from University of British Columbia. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Fermentation. The author has an hindex of 8, co-authored 22 publications receiving 4351 citations. Previous affiliations of Sydney C. Morgan include University of Adelaide & University of California, San Diego.
Topics: Population, Fermentation, Winemaking, Yeast, Medicine
Papers
More filters
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 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, 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, Broad Institute21, Harvard University22, 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, Max Planck Society32, Cornell University33, Colorado State University34, Google35, Syracuse University36, Webster University37, United States Department of Agriculture38, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences39, Colorado School of Mines40, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration41, University of Southern Mississippi42, 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: In this paper, an aptamer-based SARS-CoV-2 salivary antigen assay employing only low-cost reagents and an off-the-shelf glucometer was presented.
73 citations
TL;DR: In clinical testing, the developed assay detected SARS-CoV-2 infection in patient saliva across a range of viral loads - as benchmarked by RT-qPCR - within one hour, with 100% sensitivity (positive percent agreement) and distinguished infected specimens from off-target antigens in uninfected controls with100% specificity.
Abstract: Significant barriers to the diagnosis of latent and acute SARS-CoV-2 infection continue to hamper population-based screening efforts required to contain the COVID-19 pandemic in the absence of effective antiviral therapeutics or vaccines. We report an aptamer-based SARS-CoV-2 salivary antigen assay employing only low-cost reagents ($3.20/test) and an off-the-shelf glucometer. The test was engineered around a glucometer as it is quantitative, easy to use, and the most prevalent piece of diagnostic equipment globally making the test highly scalable with an infrastructure that is already in place. Furthermore, many glucometers connect to smartphones providing an opportunity to integrate with contract tracing apps, medical providers, and electronic medical records. In clinical testing, the developed assay detected SARS-CoV-2 infection in patient saliva across a range of viral loads - as benchmarked by RT-qPCR - within one hour, with 100% sensitivity (positive percent agreement) and distinguished infected specimens from off-target antigens in uninfected controls with 100% specificity (negative percent agreement). We propose that this approach can provide an inexpensive, rapid, and accurate diagnostic for distributed screening of SARS-CoV-2 infection at scale.
46 citations
Cited by
More filters
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 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
01 Jan 1976
TL;DR: A positive temperature coefficient is the term which has been used to indicate that an increase in solubility occurs as the temperature is raised, whereas a negative coefficient indicates a decrease in Solubility with rise in temperature.
Abstract: A positive temperature coefficient is the term which has been used to indicate that an increase in solubility occurs as the temperature is raised, whereas a negative coefficient indicates a decrease in solubility with rise in temperature.
1,573 citations
TL;DR: This protocol details MicrobiomeAnalyst, a user-friendly, web-based platform for comprehensive statistical, functional, and meta-analysis of microbiome data, a one-stop shop that enables microbiome researchers to thoroughly explore their preprocessed microbiome data via intuitive web interfaces.
Abstract: MicrobiomeAnalyst is an easy-to-use, web-based platform for comprehensive analysis of common data outputs generated from current microbiome studies. It enables researchers and clinicians with little or no bioinformatics training to explore a wide variety of well-established methods for microbiome data processing, statistical analysis, functional profiling and comparison with public datasets or known microbial signatures. MicrobiomeAnalyst currently contains four modules: Marker-gene Data Profiling (MDP), Shotgun Data Profiling (SDP), Projection with Public Data (PPD), and Taxon Set Enrichment Analysis (TSEA). This protocol will first introduce the MDP module by providing a step-wise description of how to prepare, process and normalize data; perform community profiling; identify important features; and conduct correlation and classification analysis. We will then demonstrate how to perform predictive functional profiling and introduce several unique features of the SDP module for functional analysis. The last two sections will describe the key steps involved in using the PPD and TSEA modules for meta-analysis and visual exploration of the results. In summary, MicrobiomeAnalyst offers a one-stop shop that enables microbiome researchers to thoroughly explore their preprocessed microbiome data via intuitive web interfaces. The complete protocol can be executed in ~70 min. This protocol details MicrobiomeAnalyst, a user-friendly, web-based platform for comprehensive statistical, functional, and meta-analysis of microbiome data.
823 citations
Graz University of Technology1, Université Paris-Saclay2, University of Waterloo3, Guizhou University4, European Food Information Council5, Institut national de la recherche agronomique6, Agricultural University of Athens7, University of Minnesota8, University of Minho9, University of Vienna10, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada11, Rothamsted Research12, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory13, Austrian Institute of Technology14, CABI15, Tallinn University of Technology16, Wageningen University and Research Centre17, Pondicherry University18, State University of Campinas19, University of Sydney20, Teagasc21
TL;DR: A definition of microbiome is proposed based on the compact, clear, and comprehensive description of the term provided by Whipps et al. in 1988, amended with a set of novel recommendations considering the latest technological developments and research findings.
Abstract: The field of microbiome research has evolved rapidly over the past few decades and has become a topic of great scientific and public interest. As a result of this rapid growth in interest covering different fields, we are lacking a clear commonly agreed definition of the term “microbiome.” Moreover, a consensus on best practices in microbiome research is missing. Recently, a panel of international experts discussed the current gaps in the frame of the European-funded MicrobiomeSupport project. The meeting brought together about 40 leaders from diverse microbiome areas, while more than a hundred experts from all over the world took part in an online survey accompanying the workshop. This article excerpts the outcomes of the workshop and the corresponding online survey embedded in a short historical introduction and future outlook. We propose a definition of microbiome based on the compact, clear, and comprehensive description of the term provided by Whipps et al. in 1988, amended with a set of novel recommendations considering the latest technological developments and research findings. We clearly separate the terms microbiome and microbiota and provide a comprehensive discussion considering the composition of microbiota, the heterogeneity and dynamics of microbiomes in time and space, the stability and resilience of microbial networks, the definition of core microbiomes, and functionally relevant keystone species as well as co-evolutionary principles of microbe-host and inter-species interactions within the microbiome. These broad definitions together with the suggested unifying concepts will help to improve standardization of microbiome studies in the future, and could be the starting point for an integrated assessment of data resulting in a more rapid transfer of knowledge from basic science into practice. Furthermore, microbiome standards are important for solving new challenges associated with anthropogenic-driven changes in the field of planetary health, for which the understanding of microbiomes might play a key role.
733 citations