Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28720878›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Comparison of DNA-, PMA-, and RNA-based 16S rRNA Illumina sequencing for detection of live bacteria in water.

Ru Li, Hein Min Tun, Musarrat Jahan, Zhengxiao Zhang, Ayush Kumar, W G Dilantha Fernando, Annemieke Farenhorst, Ehsan Khafipour

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 95 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
95citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

95 citing papers in PubMed, 215 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Comparison between DNA- and RNA-based nucleic acid amplification tests for detecting Mycoplasma pneumoniae in pediatric specimens.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A Pilot Study ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Single-cell quantification of the microbiota by flow cytometry: MicFLY.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ru LiDepartment of Soil Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada.
Hein Min TunDepartment of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7597-5062
Musarrat JahanDepartment of Soil Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada.
Zhengxiao ZhangDepartment of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada.
Ayush KumarDepartment of Medical Microbiology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada.
W G Dilantha FernandoDepartment of Plant Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada.
Annemieke FarenhorstDepartment of Soil Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada. Annemieke.Farenhorst@umanitoba.ca.
Ehsan KhafipourDepartment of Animal Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada. Ehsan.Khafipour@umanitoba.ca.
University of Manitoba · CAUniversity of Alberta · CAYunnan Agricultural University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The limitation of 16S rRNA gene sequencing (DNA-based) for microbial community analyses in water is the inability to differentiate live (dormant cells as well as growing or non-growing metabolically active cells) and dead cells, which can lead to false positive results in the absence of live microbes. Propidium-monoazide (PMA) has been used to selectively remove DNA from dead cells during downstream sequencing process. In comparison, 16S rRNA sequencing (RNA-based) can target live microbial cells in water as both dormant and metabolically active cells produce rRNA. The objective of this study was to compare the efficiency and sensitivity of DNA-based, PMA-based and RNA-based 16S rRNA Illumina sequencing methodologies for live bacteria detection in water samples experimentally spiked with different combination of bacteria (2 gram-negative and 2 gram-positive/acid fast species either all live, all dead, or combinations of live and dead species) or obtained from different sources (First Nation community drinking water; city of Winnipeg tap water; water from Red River, Manitoba, Canada). The RNA-based method, while was superior for detection of live bacterial cells still identified a number of 16S rRNA targets in samples spiked with dead cells. In environmental water samples, the DNA- and PMA-based approaches perhaps overestimated the richness of microbial community compared to RNA-based method. Our results suggest that the RNA-based sequencing was superior to DNA- and PMA-based methods in detecting live bacterial cells in water.

Indexed as

AzidesBacteriaDNA, BacterialHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMicrobial ViabilityMicrobiotaPropidiumReproducibility of ResultsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SWater MicrobiologyAzidesDNA, BacterialPropidiumpropidium monoazideRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID28720878
PMCPMC5515937
OpenAlexW2734785751

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.