ArticlePeerJ2019
The effect of reverse transcription enzymes and conditions on high throughput amplicon sequencing of the 16S rRNA.
Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A practical guide to targeted single-cell RNA sequencing technologies.Communications biology · 2026Review
- Amplicon-Based High-Throughput Sequencing Method for Genotypic Characterization of Norovirus in Oysters.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is assumed that the sequencing of ribosomes better reflects the active microbial community than the sequencing of the ribosomal RNA encoding genes. Yet, many studies exploring microbial communities in various environments, ranging from the human gut to deep oceans, questioned the validity of this paradigm due to the discrepancies between the DNA and RNA based communities. Here, we focus on an often neglected key step in the analysis, the reverse transcription (RT) reaction. Previous studies showed that RT may introduce biases when expressed genes and ribosmal rRNA are quantified, yet its effect on microbial diversity and community composition was never tested. High throughput sequencing of ribosomal RNA is a valuable tool to understand microbial communities as it better describes the active population than DNA analysis. However, the necessary step of RT may introduce biases that have so far been poorly described. In this manuscript, we compare three RT enzymes, commonly used in soil microbiology, in two temperature modes to determine a potential source of bias due to non-standardized RT conditions. In our comparisons, we have observed up to six fold differences in bacterial class abundance. A temperature induced bias can be partially explained by G-C content of the affected bacterial groups, thus pointing toward a need for higher reaction temperatures. However, another source of bias was due to enzyme processivity differences. This bias is potentially hard to overcome and thus mitigating it might require the use of one enzyme for the sake of cross-study comparison.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.