Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33768248›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2021

Comparison of long-read sequencing technologies in interrogating bacteria and fly genomes.

Eric S Tvedte, Mark Gasser, Benjamin C Sparklin, Jane Michalski, Carl E Hjelmen, J Spencer Johnston, Xuechu Zhao, Robin Bromley, Luke J Tallon, Lisa Sadzewicz and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
8.0field-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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. How to Unmask an Unknown: The Restriction-Modification SystemInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. DecipheringFrontiers in immunology · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eric S TvedteInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Mark GasserInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Benjamin C SparklinInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Jane MichalskiInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Carl E HjelmenDepartment of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3061-6458
J Spencer JohnstonDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA.
Xuechu ZhaoInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Robin BromleyInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Luke J TallonInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Lisa SadzewiczInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
David A RaskoInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Julie C Dunning HotoppInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
University of Maryland, Baltimore · USTexas A&M University · US

Funding

Technology CoreU19AI110820 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI WHITE, OWEN R · 2014 to 2023
$36.5M
Extent and Significance of Bacterial DNA Integrations in the Human Cancer GenomeR01CA206188 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI DUNNING HOTOPP, JULIE · 2015 to 2020
$3.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA206188NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI110820
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The newest generation of DNA sequencing technology is highlighted by the ability to generate sequence reads hundreds of kilobases in length. Pacific Biosciences (PacBio) and Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) have pioneered competitive long read platforms, with more recent work focused on improving sequencing throughput and per-base accuracy. We used whole-genome sequencing data produced by three PacBio protocols (Sequel II CLR, Sequel II HiFi, RS II) and two ONT protocols (Rapid Sequencing and Ligation Sequencing) to compare assemblies of the bacteria Escherichia coli and the fruit fly Drosophila ananassae. In both organisms tested, Sequel II assemblies had the highest consensus accuracy, even after accounting for differences in sequencing throughput. ONT and PacBio CLR had the longest reads sequenced compared to PacBio RS II and HiFi, and genome contiguity was highest when assembling these datasets. ONT Rapid Sequencing libraries had the fewest chimeric reads in addition to superior quantification of E. coli plasmids versus ligation-based libraries. The quality of assemblies can be enhanced by adopting hybrid approaches using Illumina libraries for bacterial genome assembly or polishing eukaryotic genome assemblies, and an ONT-Illumina hybrid approach would be more cost-effective for many users. Genome-wide DNA methylation could be detected using both technologies, however ONT libraries enabled the identification of a broader range of known E. coli methyltransferase recognition motifs in addition to undocumented D. ananassae motifs. The ideal choice of long read technology may depend on several factors including the question or hypothesis under examination. No single technology outperformed others in all metrics examined.

Indexed as

Escherichia coliHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingBacteriaGenome, BacterialSequence Analysis, DNATechnologybacterial genomicsDrosophila ananassaefly genomicsgenomicssequencing

Identifiers

PMID33768248
PMCPMC8495745
OpenAlexW3136857322

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.