ArticleBioinformatics and biology insights2020
Comparative Analysis of Sample Extraction and Library Construction for Shotgun Metagenomics.
Article in Bioinformatics and biology insights, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unleashing the potential of mRNA-seq to uncover the microbiome structure and their crosstalk with host cells: the vulvar ecosystem.Microbiome · 2026Article
- Metagenomic Tools as Predictive Approaches to Decipher Soil and Rhizosphere Microbial Communities and Their Functions for Sustainable Agriculture.International journal of genomics · 2026Review
- Metagenomic analysis reveals microbial drivers of heat resistance in dairy cattle.Animal microbiome · 2025Article
- Analysis of metagenomic data.Nature reviews. Methods primers · 2025Article
- Enhancing Clinical Utility: Utilization of International Standards and Guidelines for Metagenomic Sequencing in Infectious Disease Diagnosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Microbial Risks Caused by Livestock Excrement: Current Research Status and Prospects.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Evaluation of extraction and enrichment methods for recovery of respiratory RNA viruses in a metagenomics approach.Journal of virological methods · 2023Article
- Functional meta-omics provide critical insights into long- and short-read assemblies.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Elucidating biofilm diversity on water lily leaves through 16S rRNA amplicon analysis: Comparison of four DNA extraction kits.Applications in plant sciences · 2021Article
- Optimised biomolecular extraction for metagenomic analysis of microbial biofilms from high-mountain streams.PeerJ · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human fecal specimens, serve as important materials, are widely used in the field of microbiome research, in which inconsistent results have been a pressing issue. The possible attribute factors have been proposed including the specimen status after preservation, extracted DNA quality, library preparation protocol, and sample DNA input. In this study, quality comparisons for shotgun metagenomics sequencing were performed between 2 DNA extraction methods for fresh and freeze-thaw samples, 2 library preparation protocols, and various sample inputs. The results indicate that Mag-Bind® Universal Metagenomics Kit (OM) outperformed DNeasy PowerSoil Kit (QP) with a higher DNA quantity. Controlling on library preparation protocol, OM detected on-average more genes than QP. For library construction comparison by controlling on the same DNA sample, KAPA Hyper Prep Kit (KH) outperformed the TruePrep DNA Library Prep Kit V2 (TP) with the higher number of detected genes number and Shannon index. No significant differences were found in taxonomy between 2 library preparation protocols using the fresh, freeze-thaw and mock community samples. No significant difference was observed between 250 and 50 ng DNA inputs for library preparation on both fresh and freeze-thaw samples. Through the preliminary study, a combined protocol is recommended for performing metagenomics studies, by using OM method plus KH protocol as well as suitable DNA quantity on either fresh or freeze-thaw samples. Our findings provide clues for potential variations from various DNA extraction methods, library protocols, and sample DNA inputs, which are critical for consistent and comprehensive profiling of the human gut microbiome.
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.