Biodiversity and distribution of polar freshwater DNA viruses

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  19 Jun 2015:
Vol. 1, no. 5, e1400127
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1400127

eLetters is an online forum for ongoing peer review. Submission of eLetters are open to all . Please read our guidelines before submitting your own eLetter.

Compose eLetter

Plain text

  • Plain text
    No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

  • RE: abundances of

    I think this interesting work, but I have a hard time accepting some of the conclusions regarding relative abundances. Basically the authors say: "We know that MDA massively biases metagenomic analysis in favor of single strand circular DNA viruses but we are going to ignore that and report relative abundances anyway. We will however provide a couple of hand waving arguments for ignoring known bias and move on with our interpretation." Not surprisingly, single strand circular DNA viruses predominate in the data sets. No attempt was made to verify this extraordinary finding by, for instance, realtime PCR on the original unamplified samples or, better yet, use a less biased amplification methods. Unfortunately this is a common approach in many viral metagenomics analyses and compromises many studies.

    Competing Interests: None declared.

Stay Connected to Science Advances

Navigate This Article