2020 · Metabolomics · open access
Mandal et al.
A multi-institution workshop made the case for a characterised whole-stool reference material so microbiome measurements can be standardised across labs, addressing the absence of defined faecal inputs.
A paraphrase to the Library’s standard, never the abstract. The source is one link away and is always the authority.
2020
A study of three children found that the region of stool sampled did not change microbial alpha diversity, while 22 of 176 metabolites varied; homogenising the stool mattered for metabolomics and short room-temperature storage had little effect, which supports simpler home collection protocols within the limits of so small a study.
Impact of sampling regions and storage methods on fecal gut microbiome and metabolome profiles — Liang et al., mSphere · source ↗
2021
Comparison of six stool collection methods in healthy volunteers found OMNIgene Gut, FOBT cards, RNAlater and Microlution were reliable for metagenomics, whereas 95% ethanol best preserved metabolite profiles; the authors recommend using separate collection methods for different analytical aims in large population studies.
Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods on Variation in Gut Metagenomics and Untargeted Metabolomics — Guan et al., mSphere · source ↗
2019
Stool stabilised in OMNIgene·GUT then frozen produced 16S and shotgun profiles statistically indistinguishable from fresh-frozen aliquots, supporting stabilised collection where freezing is impractical.
Gut microbiome comparability of fresh-frozen versus stabilised-frozen samples by 16S and shotgun metagenomics — Ilett et al., Scientific Reports · source ↗
2018
FTA cards and OMNIgene GUT demonstrated strong concordance with immediate freezing for gut microbiome diversity and short-chain fatty acid measurements, while ethanol preserved the most metabolites overall. These stabilised collection methods enable reliable, decentralised stool sampling for large-scale microbiome and metabolomics studies.
Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods for Microbiome and Metabolomics Studies — Wang et al., Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · source ↗
2017
Expressing taxa as cells per gram of stool showed faecal microbial load varies ~10-fold between healthy people and drives apparent compositional differences: relative-abundance data alone can misrepresent quantitative change.
Quantitative microbiome profiling links gut community variation to microbial load — Vandeputte et al., Nature (paywalled) · source ↗