%0 Journal Article %A Nash, Andrea %A Auchtung, Thomas %A Wong, Matthew %A Smith, Daniel %A Gesell, Jonathan %A Ross, Matthew %A Stewart, Christopher %A Metcalf, Ginger %A Muzny, Donna %A Gibbs, Richard %A Ajami, Nadim %A Petrosino, Joseph %D 2017 %T Additional file 5: of The gut mycobiome of the Human Microbiome Project healthy cohort %U https://springernature.figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Additional_file_5_of_The_gut_mycobiome_of_the_Human_Microbiome_Project_healthy_cohort/5633020 %R 10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3938710_D5.v1 %2 https://springernature.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/9809887 %K Fungi %K Microbiota %K Microbiome %K Fungal microbiome %K Fecal microbiome %K HMP %K ITS2 %K There was a high degree o Spacer %K Metagenomics %X Extraction methods comparison. Description – Fungal DNA extraction methods comparison methods and results. Figure S2: a Alpha diversity (Observed OTUs and Shannon diversity) of both fungal DNA extraction methods. b Beta diversity (Bray-Curtis dissimilarity) of samples, colored by method, shaped by donor. c Relative abundance of fungal taxa. (PDF 344 kb) %I figshare