Skip to main content
Fig. 3 | BMC Bioinformatics

Fig. 3

From: Simulating metagenomic stable isotope probing datasets with MetaSIPSim

Fig. 3

Improvement of metagenomic-SIP relative to conventional metagenomics with respect to coverage and recovery of 13C-labeled genomes with raw reads. Values greater than zero indicate improvement of metagenomic-SIP relative to conventional metagenomics (Bonferroni correction, n = 6; ***, p-values < 0.001). a and c The difference in labeled genome (n = 100) coverage and the difference in proportion of the genome recovered (i.e. mapped to reads), respectively, varies between communities that differ in G + C content when sequenced at different depths. b and d The difference in labeled genome coverage and the difference in proportion of the genome recovered (i.e. mapped to reads, n = 50, 100, 200), respectively, for low G + C communities with respect to the number of labeled genomes per sample and for high G + C communities with respect to the position of the BD window

Back to article page