Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27176120›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2016

Optimized Illumina PCR-free library preparation for bacterial whole genome sequencing and analysis of factors influencing de novo assembly.

Christopher Huptas, Siegfried Scherer, Mareike Wenning

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Draft Genome Sequence of Mobilitalea sibirica Strain P3M-3Microbiology resource announcements · 2021
    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

3 authors.

Christopher HuptasLehrstuhl für Mikrobielle Ökologie, Zentralinstitut für Ernährungs-und Lebensmittelforschung (ZIEL), Wissenschaftszentrum Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, Weihenstephaner Berg 3, 85354, Freising, Germany.
Siegfried SchererLehrstuhl für Mikrobielle Ökologie, Zentralinstitut für Ernährungs-und Lebensmittelforschung (ZIEL), Wissenschaftszentrum Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, Weihenstephaner Berg 3, 85354, Freising, Germany.
Mareike WenningLehrstuhl für Mikrobielle Ökologie, Zentralinstitut für Ernährungs-und Lebensmittelforschung (ZIEL), Wissenschaftszentrum Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, Weihenstephaner Berg 3, 85354, Freising, Germany. mareike.wenning@wzw.tum.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNext-generation sequencing (NGS) technology has paved the way for rapid and cost-efficient de novo sequencing of bacterial genomes. In particular, the introduction of PCR-free library preparation procedures (LPPs) lead to major improvements as PCR bias is largely reduced. However, in order to facilitate the assembly of Illumina paired-end sequence data and to enhance assembly performance, an increase of insert sizes to facilitate the repeat bridging and resolution capabilities of current state of the art assembly tools is needed. In addition, information concerning the relationships between genomic GC content, library insert size and sequencing quality as well as the influence of library insert size, read length and sequencing depth on assembly performance would be helpful to specifically target sequencing projects.

resultsOptimized DNA fragmentation settings and fine-tuned resuspension buffer to bead buffer ratios during fragment size selection were integrated in the Illumina TruSeq(®) DNA PCR-free LPP in order to produce sequencing libraries varying in average insert size for bacterial genomes within a range of 35.4-73.0 % GC content. The modified protocol consumes only half of the reagents per sample, thus doubling the number of preparations possible with a kit. Examination of different libraries revealed that sequencing quality decreases with increased genomic GC content and with larger insert sizes. The estimation of assembly performance using assembly metrics like corrected NG50 and NGA50 showed that libraries with larger insert sizes can result in substantial assembly improvements as long as appropriate assembly tools are chosen. However, such improvements seem to be limited to genomes with a low to medium GC content. A positive trend between read length and assembly performance was observed while sequencing depth is less important, provided a minimum coverage is reached.

conclusionsBased on the optimized protocol developed, sequencing libraries with flexible insert sizes and lower reagent costs can be generated. Furthermore, increased knowledge about the interplay of sequencing quality, insert size, genomic GC content, read length, sequencing depth and the assembler used will help molecular biologists to set up an optimal experimental and analytical framework with respect to Illumina next-generation sequencing of bacterial genomes.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialDNA, BacterialPolymerase Chain ReactionDNA, BacterialAssemblerAssembly performanceAverage library insert sizeGenomic GC contentIlluminaNext generation sequencingPCR-free sample preparationRead depthRead sizeSequencing quality

Identifiers

PMID27176120
PMCPMC4864918

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.