Table 3.

Influence of signal adjustments on relative abundance of bacterial classes

Class	Sample 1: signal adjustment			Sample 2: signal adjustment
	None*	CH †	CH+16S copy ‡	None*	CH †	CH+16S copy ‡
Alphaproteobacteria	-	-	-	<0.1%	<0.1%	<0.1%
Betaproteobacteria	1.1%	1.3%	3.1%	1.2%	1.4%	3.5%
Gammaproteobacteria	0.8%	1.0%	1.1%	0.5%	0.6%	0.8%
Deltaproteobacteria	0.5%	0.6%	0.9%	0.5%	0.6%	1.0%
Epsilonproteobacteria	-	-	-	-	-	-
Clostridia	79.8%	77.1%	64.4%	80.9%	78.4%	67.7%
Mollicutes	0.2%	0.2%	1.0%	0.4%	0.5%	2.2%
Bacilli	2.0%	2.3%	2.8%	5.1%	6.1%	8.2%
Actinobacteria	5.9%	6.7%	13.3%	0.7%	0.9%	2.2%
Spirochaetes	<0.1%	<0.1%	0.1%	<0.1%	<0.1%	0.1%
Bacteroidetes	9.0%	9.8%	11.6%	10.3%	11.1%	13.7%
Verrucomicrobiae	0.6%	0.7%	1.3%	0.3%	0.4%	0.7%
Lentisphaerae	0.1%	0.1%	0.5%	<0.1%	<0.1%	<0.1%

Comparisons were carried out for samples subjected to 25 cycles of PCR amplification.

^*No adjustment was applied to normalized signal values.

^†Signal was adjusted by the cross-hybridization algorithm.

^‡Signal was first adjusted by the cross-hybridization algorithm, and then by the average number of 16S rRNA gene copies per bacterial genome.

“-“ – none detected.