Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31444199›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2019

Relative Performance of MinION (Oxford Nanopore Technologies) versus Sequel (Pacific Biosciences) Third-Generation Sequencing Instruments in Identification of Agricultural and Forest Fungal Pathogens.

Kaire Loit, Kalev Adamson, Mohammad Bahram, Rasmus Puusepp, Sten Anslan, Riinu Kiiker, Rein Drenkhan, Leho Tedersoo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Pike: OTU-Level Analysis for Oxford Nanopore Amplicon Metagenomics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Barcode 100K Specimens: In a Single Nanopore Run.Molecular ecology resources · 2025
    Article
  15. Fusarium Genome Sequencing and Assembly.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Kaire Loit *Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.
Kalev Adamson *Institute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.
Mohammad Bahram *Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Rasmus Puusepp *Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Sten AnslanZoological Institute, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.
Riinu KiikerInstitute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.
Rein DrenkhanInstitute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.
Leho TedersooInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia leho.tedersoo@ut.ee.ORCID 0000-0002-1635-1249
Estonian University of Life Sciences · EESwedish University of Agricultural Sciences · SETechnische Universität Braunschweig · DEUniversity of Tartu · EEUniversity of Tartu Natural History Museum and Botanical Garden · EE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Culture-based molecular identification methods have revolutionized detection of pathogens, yet these methods are slow and may yield inconclusive results from environmental materials. The second-generation sequencing tools have much-improved precision and sensitivity of detection, but these analyses are costly and may take several days to months. Of the third-generation sequencing techniques, the portable MinION device (Oxford Nanopore Technologies) has received much attention because of its small size and possibility of rapid analysis at reasonable cost. Here, we compare the relative performances of two third-generation sequencing instruments, MinION and Sequel (Pacific Biosciences), in identification and diagnostics of fungal and oomycete pathogens from conifer (Pinaceae) needles and potato (

Indexed as

NanoporesAgricultureAscomycotaBiodiversityComputational BiologyForestsFungiHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMetagenomicsOomycetesPathology, MolecularPlant DiseasesSequence AlignmentSolanum tuberosumfungal plant pathogensmetabarcodingmetagenomicsmolecular diagnosticsneedle pathogensoomycetesOxford Nanopore MinIONPacBio Sequelplant pathogenspotatoSolanum tuberosum

Identifiers

PMID31444199
PMCPMC6803294
OpenAlexW2969234820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.