From: Performance comparison of different microbial DNA extraction methods on bird feces
Dietary guild | Phylum | FDR | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bead vs. MoBio | Significance level | Bead vs. Qiagen | Significance level | MoBio vs. Qiagen | Significance level | ||
Granivore | Firmicutes | 0.823 | ns | 1.000 | ns | 1.000 | ns |
Proteobacteria | 0.800 | ns | 1.000 | ns | 1.000 | ns | |
Actinobacteria | 0.977 | ns | 0.980 | ns | 1.000 | ns | |
Cyanobacteria | 0.937 | ns | 0.824 | ns | 0.975 | ns | |
Acidobacteria | 0.888 | ns | 0.588 | ns | 1.000 | ns | |
Chlamydiae | 0.918 | ns | 1.000 | ns | 1.000 | ns | |
Gemmatimonadetes | 1.000 | ns | 0.907 | ns | 1.000 | ns | |
Nitrospirae | 0.821 | ns | 0.831 | ns | 1.000 | ns | |
Chloroflexi | 1.000 | ns | 1.000 | ns | 1.000 | ns | |
Tenericutes | 0.740 | ns | 0.892 | ns | 1.000 | ns | |
Omnivore | Firmicutes | 0.294 | ns | 0.255 | ns | < 0.001 | *** |
Proteobacteria | 0.102 | ns | 0.002 | ** | < 0.001 | *** | |
Cyanobacteria | 0.476 | ns | 0.376 | ns | 0.338 | ns | |
Acidobacteria | 0.491 | ns | 0.718 | ns | 0.403 | ns | |
Gemmatimonadetes | 0.812 | ns | 0.541 | ns | 0.388 | ns | |
Actinobacteria | 0.288 | ns | 0.397 | ns | 0.506 | ns | |
Carnivore | Proteobacteria | < 0.001 | *** | 0.954 | ns | < 0.001 | *** |
Firmicutes | < 0.001 | *** | 0.077 | ns | 0.001 | ** | |
Actinobacteria | 0.680 | ns | 0.160 | ns | 0.262 | ns | |
Bacteroidetes | 0.141 | ns | < 0.001 | *** | 0.671 | ns | |
Unclassified | 0.008 | ** | 0.161 | ns | 0.537 | ns | |
Verrucomicrobia | 0.040 | * | 0.068 | ns | 0.133 | ns | |
Chloroflexi | 0.040 | * | 0.061 | ns | 0.186 | ns | |
Gemmatimonadetes | 0.040 | * | 0.096 | ns | 0.117 | ns | |
Acidobacteria | 0.008 | ** | 0.088 | ns | 0.137 | ns |