Papers › Elementary methods provide more replicable results in microbial differential abundance analysis

Elementary methods provide more replicable results in microbial differential abundance analysis

3 Apr 2024arXiv:2404.02691links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Juho Pelto, Kari Auranen, Janne Kujala, Leo Lahti

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

Differential abundance analysis is a key component of microbiome studies. Although dozens of methods exist there is currently no consensus on the preferred methods. While the correctness of results in differential abundance analysis is an ambiguous concept and cannot be fully evaluated without setting the ground truth and employing simulated data, we argue that a well-performing method should be effective in producing highly reproducible results. We compared the performance of 14 differential abundance analysis methods by employing datasets from 53 taxonomic profiling studies based on 16S rRNA gene or shotgun metagenomic sequencing. For each method, we examined how the results replicated between random partitions of each dataset and between datasets from separate studies. While certain methods showed good consistency, some widely used methods were observed to produce a substantial number of conflicting findings. Overall, when considering consistency together with sensitivity, the best performance was attained by analyzing relative abundances with a non-parametric method (Wilcoxon test or ordinal regression model) or linear regression/t-test. Moreover, a comparable performance was obtained by analyzing presence/absence of taxa with logistic regression.

PaperPDFCode

Code

jepelt/daa_replicability officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHub report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections