4.8 Article

Phylogenetic Core Groups: a promising concept in search of a consistent methodological framework

Journal

MICROBIOME
Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s40168-021-01023-y

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Simons Collaboration: Principles of Microbial Ecosystems (PriME) [542381]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The comment analyzes the novel concept of PCG proposed by Aguirre de Carcer, identifying logical and methodological flaws and proposing methodological refinements. These refinements help to determine PCGs more consistently, promoting PCGs as a valuable tool in microbial ecology.
In this comment, we analyse the conceptual framework proposed by Aguirre de Carcer (Microbiome 7:142, 2019), introducing the novel concept of Phylogenetic Core Groups (PCGs). This notion aims to complement the traditional classification in operational taxonomic units (OTUs), widely used in microbial ecology, to provide a more intrinsic taxonomical classification which avoids the use of pre-determined thresholds. However, to introduce this concept, the author frames his proposal in a wider theoretical framework based on a conceptualization of selection that we argue is a tautology. This blurs the subsequent formulation of an assembly principle for microbial communities, favouring that some contradictory examples introduced to support the framework appear aligned in their conclusions. And more importantly, under this framework and its derived methodology, it is not possible to infer PCGs from data in a consistent way. We reanalyse the proposal to identify its logical and methodological flaws and, through the analysis of synthetic scenarios, we propose a number of methodological refinements to contribute towards the determination of PCGs in a consistent way. We hope our analysis will promote the exploration of PCGs as a potentially valuable tool, helping to bridge the gap between environmental conditions and community composition in microbial ecology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available