Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32071706›Full record

ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2020

Computational methods for 16S metabarcoding studies using Nanopore sequencing data.

Andres Santos, Ronny van Aerle, Leticia Barrientos, Jaime Martinez-Urtaza

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

71 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Systematic Review: Long-Read Sequencing in Algal Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Characterization of the OmnivorousEcology and evolution · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

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.

Andres SantosApplied and Molecular Biology Laboratory, Centre of Excellence in Translational Medicine, Universidad de La Frontera, Avenida Alemania 0458, 4810296 Temuco, Chile.
Ronny van AerleCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Barrack Road, Weymouth, Dorset DT4 8UB, UK.
Leticia BarrientosApplied and Molecular Biology Laboratory, Centre of Excellence in Translational Medicine, Universidad de La Frontera, Avenida Alemania 0458, 4810296 Temuco, Chile.
Jaime Martinez-UrtazaCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Barrack Road, Weymouth, Dorset DT4 8UB, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessment of bacterial diversity through sequencing of 16S ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA) genes has been an approach widely used in environmental microbiology, particularly since the advent of high-throughput sequencing technologies. An additional innovation introduced by these technologies was the need of developing new strategies to manage and investigate the massive amount of sequencing data generated. This situation stimulated the rapid expansion of the field of bioinformatics with the release of new tools to be applied to the downstream analysis and interpretation of sequencing data mainly generated using Illumina technology. In recent years, a third generation of sequencing technologies has been developed and have been applied in parallel and complementarily to the former sequencing strategies. In particular, Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) introduced nanopore sequencing which has become very popular among molecular ecologists. Nanopore technology offers a low price, portability and fast sequencing throughput. This powerful technology has been recently tested for 16S rRNA analyses showing promising results. However, compared with previous technologies, there is a scarcity of bioinformatic tools and protocols designed specifically for the analysis of Nanopore 16S sequences. Due its notable characteristics, researchers have recently started performing assessments regarding the suitability MinION on 16S rRNA sequencing studies, and have obtained remarkable results. Here we present a review of the state-of-the-art of MinION technology applied to microbiome studies, the current possible application and main challenges for its use on 16S rRNA metabarcoding.

Indexed as

Microbial diversityMinIONThird generation sequencing

Identifiers

PMID32071706
PMCPMC7013242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.