The Ecuadorian Microbiome Project: a plea to strengthen microbial genomic research

References

• Whitman WB, Coleman DC, Wiebe WJ. Prokaryotes: the unseen majority. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;95(12):6578–6583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wooley JC, Godzik A, Friedberg I. A primer on metagenomics. PLoS Comput Biol. 2010;6(2):e1000667.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dokkum PG, Conroy C. A substantial population of low-mass stars in luminous elliptical galaxies. Nature. 2010;468(7326):940.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMahon S, Parnell J. Weighing the deep continental biosphere. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2014;87(1):113–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins RJ, Krishtalka L, Wooley JC. Advances in biodiversity: metagenomics and the unveiling of biological dark matter. Stand Genomic Sci. 2016;11(1):69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rinke C, Schwientek P, Sczyrba A, et al. Insights into the phylogeny and coding potential of microbial dark matter. Nature. 2013;499(7459):431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hug LA, Baker BJ, Anantharaman K, et al. A new view of the tree of life. Nat Microbiol. 2016;1(5):16048.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillespie DE, Rondon MR, Williamson LLHJ. Metagenomic libraries from uncultured microorganisms. In: Osborn AMSC, editor. Mol. Microb. Ecol. New York: Taylor & Francis; 2005. p. 261–279.
   Google Scholar
• Timmis K, de Vos WM, Ramos JL, et al. The contribution of microbial biotechnology to sustainable development goals. Microbiol Biotechnol. 2017;10(5):984–987.
   Google Scholar
• Helmreich S. Species of biocapital. Sci Cult. (Lond). 2008;17(4):463–478.
   Google Scholar
• Janzen DH. Hope for tropical biodiversity through true bioliteracy. Biotropica. 2010;42(5):540–542.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janzen DH, Godfray HCJ, Knapp S. Now is the time. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2004;359(1444):731–732.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedroza Flores R, Villalobos Monroy G, Reyes Fabela A. A critique on the concept of social accountability in higher education. J Educ Learn. 2015;4:1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis R, Waterton C, Wynne B. Taxonomy, biodiversity and their publics in twenty-first-century DNA barcoding. Public Underst. Sci. 2010;19(4):497–512.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enriquez J, Martínez R. The biotechonomy (1.0): a rough map of bio-data flow. Harvard Business School Working Paper. 2002;3(28):1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Vestergaard G, Schulz S, Schöler A, et al. Making big data smart—how to use metagenomics to understand soil quality. Biol Fertil Soils. 2017;53(5):479–484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xia J, Liu Y. Usage patterns of open genomic data. Coll Res Libr. 2013;74(2):195–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bevan MW, Uauy C, Wulff BBH, et al. Genomic innovation for crop improvement. Nature. 2017;543(7645):346–354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan R, Mittelman D. Consumer genomics will change your life, whether you get tested or not. Genome Biol. 2018;19(1):120.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Milne R. From people with dementia to people with data: participation and value in Alzheimer’s disease research. Biosocieties. 2018;13(3):623–639.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibrahim MHA, Lebbe L, Willems A, et al. Chelatococcus thermostellatus sp. nov., a new thermophile for bioplastic synthesis: comparative phylogenetic and physiological study. AMB Express. 2016;6(1):39.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mutreja A. Chapter 8 – Microbial genomics: diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. In: Kumar D, Antonarakis SBT-M, Hg, editors. Medical and Health Genomics. Oxford: Academic Press; 2016. p. 101–106.
   Google Scholar
• Marx V. How some labs put more bio into biomaterials. Nat Methods. 2019;16(5):365–368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priefer C, Jörissen J, Frör O. Pathways to shape the bioeconomy. Resources. 2017;6(10):261–279.
   Google Scholar
• De Las Rivas J, Bonavides-Martínez C, Campos-Laborie FJ. Bioinformatics in Latin America and SoIBio impact, a tale of spin-off and expansion around genomes and protein structures. Brief Bioinform. 2017;18(6):1091.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson LR, Sanders JG, McDonald D, et al. A communal catalogue reveals Earth’s multiscale microbial diversity. Nature. 2017;551(7681):457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert JA, Meyer F, Jansson J, et al. The Earth Microbiome Project: meeting report of the “1(st) EMP meeting on sample selection and acquisition” at Argonne national laboratory. Stand Genomic Sci. 2010;3:249–253.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert JA, Jansson JK, Knight R. The Earth Microbiome Project: successes and aspirations. BMC Biol. 2014;12(1):69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogel TM, Simonet P, Jansson JK, et al. TerraGenome: a consortium for the sequencing of a soil metagenome. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2009;7(4):252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pylro V, Roesch L. The Brazilian Microbiome Project. In: Pylro VRL, editor. The Brazilian Microbiome, Current Status and Perspectives. Cham: Springer; 2017. p. 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Montoya E, Keen HF, Luzuriaga CX, et al. Long-term vegetation dynamics in a megadiverse hotspot: the ice-age record of a pre-montane forest of central Ecuador. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mittermeier R, Robles Gil P, Hoffmann M, et al. Hotspots revisited. Earth’s biologically richest and most endangered terrestrial ecoregions. Conserv Int. Mexico City: CEMEX S. A de C. V; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Lu Z. PubMed and beyond: a survey of web tools for searching biomedical literature. Database (Oxford). 2011;2011:baq036.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SimilarWeb LTD 2019. SimilarWeb.com – competitive Intelligence Tool [Internet]. [ cited 2019 Jan 16]. Available from: http://www.similarweb.com/.
   Google Scholar
• Ismailova R, Inal Y. Accessibility evaluation of top university websites: a comparative study of Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkey. Univers Access Inf Soc. 2018;17(2):437–445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kagan S, Bekkerman R. Predicting purchase behavior of website audiences. Int J Electron. Commer. 2018;22(4):510–539.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goncalves JR, de Oliveira DD, Sassi RJ. Classification of web history tools through web analysis. HCI cybersecurity Priv. Trust. Fist Int. Conf. Orlando, FL; 2019. p. 266–276.
   Google Scholar
• Wang M, Pfleeger S, Adamson D, et al. Technology transfer of federally funded R&D: perspectives from a forum. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Science and Technology Policy Institute; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Król K, Halva J. Measuring efficiency of websites of agrotouristic farms from Poland and Slovakia. Econ Reg Stud. 2017;10:50–59.
   Google Scholar
• David P, Martin P. Website traffic measurement and rankings: competitive intelligence tools examination. Int J Web Inf Syst. 2018;14(4):423–437.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mbaye B, Gueye A, Banse D, et al. Africa’s online access: what data is getting accessed and where it is hosted? Innovations and interdisciplinary solutions for underserved areas. Bassioni G, Kebe CMF, Gueye A, et al., editors. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. p.50–61.
   Google Scholar
• Król K. Marketing potential of websites of rural tourism facilities in Poland. Econ Reg Stud. 2019;12(2):158–172.
   Google Scholar
• Lorenz P, Eck J. Metagenomics and industrial applications. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2005;3(6):510–516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajan KS. Biocapital, the constitution of postgenomic life. Durham and London: Duke University Press; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Oldham P, Hall S, Forero O. Biological diversity in the patent system. PLoS One. 2013;8(11):e78737–e78737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Şener S, Sarıdoğan E. The effects of science-technology-innovation on competitiveness and economic growth. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2011;24:815–828.
   Google Scholar
• Moser P. Patents and innovation: evidence from economic history. J Econ Perspect. 2013;27(1):23–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu B, Habisch A, Thogersen J. The importance of cultural values and trust for innovation — a european study. Int J Innov. Manag. 2017;22(2):1850017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation EP Espacenet: patent search [Internet]. Munich: The European Patent Organization; [cited 2019 Mar 25]. Available from: worldwide.espacenet.com.
   Google Scholar
• Fellows I. wordcloud: Word Clouds. [R package]. Version 2.6. 2018. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=wordcloud.
   Google Scholar
• Feinerer I, Hornik K. tm: Text Mining Package. [R package]. Version 0.7–8. 2008. Available from: https://r-forge.r-project.org/projects/tm/.
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing [Downloadable software]. Version 3.5.3. Viena: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Austria; 2020. Available from: https://www.r-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Ribeiro B, Shapira P. Private and public values of innovation: a patent analysis of synthetic biology. Res Policy. 2020;49(1):103875.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Goto A, Nagata A, et al. R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States. Res Policy. 2002;31(8–9):1349–1367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan JC, Daly TM. Barriers to innovation and knowledge generation: the challenges of conducting business and social research in an emerging country context. J Innov Knowl. 2019;4(1):47–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tighe S, Afshinnekoo E, Rock TM, et al. Genomic methods and microbiological technologies for profiling novel and extreme environments for the Extreme Microbiome Project (XMP). Journal of Biomolecular Techniques : JBT. 2017;28(1):31–39..
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, et al. DADA2: high-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nature Methods. 2016;13(7):581–583.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods. 2010;7(5):335–336..
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolyen E, Rideout JR, Dillon MR, et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;37(8):852–857.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schloss PD, Westcott SL, Ryabin T, et al. Introducing mothur: open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009;75(23):7537–7541. /10/02. 2009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJJ, et al. The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data. 2016;3(1):160018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mons B, Neylon C, Velterop J, et al. Cloudy, increasingly FAIR; revisiting the FAIR Data guiding principles for the European Open Science Cloud. Inf Serv Use. 2017;37:49–56.
   Google Scholar
• Rojas Blanco DL. Vicisitudes del Protocolo de Nagoya en Colombia. Gestión y Ambiente. 2013;16:17–23.
   Google Scholar
• Stulberg E, Fravel D, Proctor LM, et al. An assessment of US microbiome research. Nat Microbiol. 2016;1(1):15015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packer A. The SciELO open access: a gold way from the south. Can. J High Educ. 2010;39(3):111–126.
   Google Scholar
• Clavero M. “Awkward wording. Rephrase”: linguistic injustice in ecological journals. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010;25(10):552–553.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salager-Meyer F. Writing and publishing in peripheral scholarly journals: how to enhance the global influence of multilingual scholars? J English Acad Purp. 2014;13:78–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pronskikh V. Linguistic privilege and justice: what can we learn from STEM? Philos. Pap. 2018;47:71–92.
   Google Scholar
• Hidalgo CA, Hausmann R. The building blocks of economic complexity. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2009;106(26):10570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feyen J, Van Hoof HB. An analysis of the relationship between higher education performance and socio-economic and technological indicators: the Latin American case study. MASKANA. 2013;4(2):1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Magee SP. Lawyers as spam, congressional capture explains why U.S. lawyers exceed the optimum. In: Buckley FH, editor. Am. ilness, essays rule law. London: Yale University Press; 2013. p. 100–117.
   Google Scholar
• Alves RJ, Weksler M, Oliveira JA, et al. Brazilian legislation on genetic heritage harms Biodiversity Convention goals and threatens basic biology research and education. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias. 2018;90(2):1279–1284.
   Google Scholar
• Bockmann FA, Rodrigues MT, Kohsldorf T, et al. Brazil´s government attacks biodiversity. Science. 2018;360(6391):865.
   Google Scholar
• Prathapan KD, Pethiyagoda R, Bawa KS, et al. When the cure kills—CBD limits biodiversity research. Science. 2018;360(6396):1405–1406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Befort N. Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: the contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2020;153:119923.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aguilar A, Twardowski T, Wohlgemuth R. Bioeconomy for sustainable development. Biotechnol J. 2019;14(8):1800638.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen A, Krisjansen I. Assembling ‘the bioeconomy’: exploiting the power of the promissory life sciences. J Sociol. 2015;51(1):28–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goven J, Pavone V. The bioeconomy as political project: a Polanyian analysis. Sci Technol Hum Values. 2015;40(3):302–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aguilar A, Wohlgemuth R, Twardowski T. Perspectives on bioeconomy. N Biotechnol. 2018;40:181–184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush V. Science, the endless frontier: a report to the President on a program for postwar scientific research. Washington DC: United States Government Printing Office; 1945.
   Google Scholar
• Roser M, Ortiz-Ospina E. Global rise of education [Internet]. OurWorldInData.org. 2019 [cited 2019 Mar 25]. Available from: https://ourworldindata.org/global-rise-of-education.
   Google Scholar
• Paz y Miño C. Lo inédito de Inédita. Redacción Médica [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2019 Mar 25]. Available from: https://www.edicionmedica.ec/opinion/lo-inedito-de-inedita-2028.
   Google Scholar
• Fernández F. The impediment for the study of the biodiversity in Colombia. Caldasia. 2011;33:3–5.
   Google Scholar
• Páez VP. Colombia’s tax on wildlife studies. Science. 2016;354(6309):191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rusch DB, Halpern AL, Sutton G, et al. The Sorcerer II global ocean sampling expedition: northwest Atlantic through eastern tropical Pacific. PLoS Biol. 2007;5(3):e77–e77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma AK, Zhaxybayeva O, Papke RT, et al. Actinorhodopsins: proteorhodopsin-like gene sequences found predominantly in non-marine environments. Environ Microbiol. 2008;10(4):1039–1056.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardenas PA, Cooper PJ, Cox MJ, et al. Upper airways microbiota in antibiotic-naïve wheezing and healthy infants from the tropics of rural Ecuador. PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e46803–e46803. /10/05. 2012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loire E, Chiari Y, Bernard A, et al. Population genomics of the endangered giant Galápagos tortoise. Genome Biol. 2013;14(12):R136–R136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colehour AM, Meadow JF, Liebert MA, et al. Local domestication of lactic acid bacteria via cassava beer fermentation. PeerJ. 2014;2:e479–e479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong P-Y, Mao Y, Ortiz-Kofoed S, et al. Metagenomic-based study of the phylogenetic and functional gene diversity in Galápagos land and marine iguanas. Microb Ecol. 2015;69(2):444–456.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bresciano JC, Salvador CA, Paz-y-Miño C, et al. Variation in the presence of anti-Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis bacteria of amphibians across life stages and elevations in Ecuador. Ecohealth. 2015;12(2):310–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLellan SL, Fisher JC, Newton RJ. The microbiome of urban waters. Int Microbiol. 2015;18(3):141–149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trueba AF, Ritz T, Trueba G. The role of the microbiome in the relationship of asthma and affective disorders. In: Lyte M, editor. Microb. Endocrinol. interkingdom Signal Infect Dis Heal. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 263–288.
   Google Scholar
• Bouhajja E, Agathos SN, George IF. Metagenomics: probing pollutant fate in natural and engineered ecosystems. Biotechnol Adv. 2016;34(8):1413–1426.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nesme J, Achouak W, Agathos SN, et al. Back to the future of soil metagenomics. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouhajja E, McGuire M, Liles MR, et al. Identification of novel toluene monooxygenase genes in a hydrocarbon-polluted sediment using sequence- and function-based screening of metagenomic libraries. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2017;101(2):797–808.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arrieta M-C, Arévalo A, Stiemsma L, et al. Associations between infant fungal and bacterial dysbiosis and childhood atopic wheeze in a nonindustrialized setting. J Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2017/ 12/11. 2018;142(2):424–434.e10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barragan V, Olivas S, Keim P, et al. Critical knowledge gaps in our understanding of environmental cycling and transmission of Leptospira spp. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2017;83(19):e01190–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barragan V, Nieto N, Keim P, et al. Meta-analysis to estimate the load of Leptospira excreted in urine: beyond rats as important sources of transmission in low-income rural communities. BMC Res Notes. 2017;10(1):71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ben-Yosef M, Zaada DSY, Dudaniec RY, et al. Host-specific associations affect the microbiome of Philornis downsi, an introduced parasite to the Galápagos Islands. Mol Ecol. 2017;26(18):4644–4656.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfeiffer S, Mitter B, Oswald A, et al. Rhizosphere microbiomes of potato cultivated in the high Andes show stable and dynamic core microbiomes with different responses to plant development. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2016;93(2):93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carvajal-Aldaz DG, Guice JL, Page RC, et al. Simultaneous delivery of antibiotics neomycin and ampicillin in drinking water inhibits fermentation of resistant starch in rats. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2016;61(3):1600609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loayza Villa MF, Herrera Sevilla VL, Vivar-Diaz N. Detection of Helicobacter pylori DNA in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded gastric biopsies using laser microdissection and qPCR. In: Bishop-Lilly KA, editor. Diagnostic Bacteriol methods Protoc. New York: Springer New York; 2017. p. 71–88.
   Google Scholar
• Gainza O, Ramírez C, Ramos AS, et al. Intestinal microbiota of white shrimp Penaeus vannamei under intensive cultivation conditions in Ecuador. Microb Ecol. 2018;75(3):562–568.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suzuki TA, Martins FM, Nachman MW. Altitudinal variation of the gut microbiota in wild house mice. Mol Ecol. 2019;28(9):2378–2390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgos FA, Ray CL, Arias CR. Bacterial diversity and community structure of the intestinal microbiome of Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) during ontogenesis. Syst Appl Microbiol. 2018;41(5):494–505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo X, Stedtfeld RD, Hedman H, et al. Antibiotic resistome associated with small-scale poultry production in rural Ecuador. Environ Sci Technol. 2018;52(15):8165–8172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wise EL, Pullan ST, Márquez S, et al. Isolation of Oropouche virus from febrile patient, Ecuador. Emerg Infect Dis. 2018;24(5):935–937.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santos JC, Tarvin RD, O’Connell LA, et al. Diversity within diversity: parasite species richness in poison frogs assessed by transcriptomics. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2018;125:40–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerrero-Latorre L, Romero B, Bonifaz E, et al. Quito’s virome: metagenomic analysis of viral diversity in urban streams of Ecuador’s capital city. Sci Total Environ. 2018;645:1334–1343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane-Petter W. The provision and use of pathogen-free laboratory animals. Proc R Soc Med. 1962;55:253–263.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marchesi JR, Ravel J. The vocabulary of microbiome research: a proposal. Microbiome. 2015;3(1):31.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lederberg J, McCray AT. ’Ome sweet ’omics - a genealogical treasury of words. Sci. 2001;15:8.
   Google Scholar
• Whipps J, Lewis K, Cooke R. Mycoparasitism and plant disease control. In: Burge N, editor. Fungi Biol. Control Syst. Manchester: Manchester University Press; 1988. p. 187.
   Google Scholar
• Ursell LK, Metcalf JL, Parfrey LW, et al. Defining the human microbiome. Nutr Rev. 2012;70(Suppl 1):S38–S44.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Prescott SL. History of medicine: origin of the term microbiome and why it matters. Hum Microbiome J. 2017;4:24–25.
   Google Scholar
• Handelsman J, Rondon MR, Brady SF, et al. Molecular biological access to the chemistry of unknown soil microbes: a new frontier for natural products. Chem Biol. 1998;5(10):5.
   Google Scholar
• Handelsman J. Metagenomics: application of genomics to uncultured microorganisms. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2004;68(4):669–685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council (US). The new science of metagenomics: revealing the secrets of our microbial planet. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2007.
   Google Scholar