4.7 Editorial Material

Brazilian Microbiome Project: Revealing the Unexplored Microbial Diversity-Challenges and Prospects

期刊

MICROBIAL ECOLOGY
卷 67, 期 2, 页码 237-241

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00248-013-0302-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/C/00005196, BB/K005332/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. BBSRC [BB/K005332/1, BBS/E/C/00005196] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Brazilian Microbiome Project (BMP) aims to assemble a Brazilian Metagenomic Consortium/Database. At present, many metagenomic projects underway in Brazil are widely known. Our goal in this initiative is to co-ordinate and standardize these together with new projects to come. It is estimated that Brazil hosts approximately 20 % of the entire world's macroorganism biological diversity. It is 1 of the 17 countries that share nearly 70 % of the world's catalogued animal and plant species, and is recognized as one of the most megadiverse countries. At the end of 2012, Brazil has joined GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility), as associated member, to improve the access to the Brazilian biodiversity data in a free and open way. This was an important step toward increasing international collaboration and clearly shows the commitment of the Brazilian government in directing national policies toward sustainable development. Despite its importance, the Brazilian microbial diversity is still considered to be largely unknown, and it is clear that to maintain ecosystem dynamics and to sustainably manage land use, it is crucial to understand the biological and functional diversity of the system. This is the first attempt to collect and collate information about Brazilian microbial genetic and functional diversity in a systematic and holistic manner. The success of the BMP depends on a massive collaborative effort of both the Brazilian and international scientific communities, and therefore, we invite all colleagues to participate in this project.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据