Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23056573›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Read length versus depth of coverage for viral quasispecies reconstruction.

Osvaldo Zagordi, Martin Däumer, Christian Beisel, Niko Beerenwinkel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Setu: a pipeline for the robust assembly of SARS-CoV-2 genomes.Microbiology resource announcements · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Genomic characterization of hepatitis C virus transmitted founder variants with deep sequencing.Infection, genetics and evolution : journal of molecular epidemiology and evolutionary genetics in infectious diseases · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Osvaldo ZagordiInstitute of Medical Virology, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Martin Däumer
Christian Beisel
Niko Beerenwinkel

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advancements of sequencing technology have opened up unprecedented opportunities in many application areas. Virus samples can now be sequenced efficiently with very deep coverage to infer the genetic diversity of the underlying virus populations. Several sequencing platforms with different underlying technologies and performance characteristics are available for viral diversity studies. Here, we investigate how the differences between two common platforms provided by 454/Roche and Illumina affect viral diversity estimation and the reconstruction of viral haplotypes. Using a mixture of ten HIV clones sequenced with both platforms and additional simulation experiments, we assessed the trade-off between sequencing coverage, read length, and error rate. For fixed costs, short Illumina reads can be generated at higher coverage and allow for detecting variants at lower frequencies. They can also be sufficient to assess the diversity of the sample if sequences are dissimilar enough, but, in general, assembly of full-length haplotypes is feasible only with the longer 454/Roche reads. The quantitative comparison highlights the advantages and disadvantages of both platforms and provides guidance for the design of viral diversity studies.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsGenes, ViralHaplotypesSequence Analysis, DNASoftware

Identifiers

PMID23056573
PMCPMC3463535

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.