Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34703674›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2021

Highly comparable metabarcoding results from MGI-Tech and Illumina sequencing platforms.

Sten Anslan, Vladimir Mikryukov, Kęstutis Armolaitis, Jelena Ankuda, Dagnija Lazdina, Kristaps Makovskis, Lars Vesterdal, Inger Kappel Schmidt, Leho Tedersoo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Novel mutation inInternational journal of ophthalmology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Seven draft genome sequences ofMicrobiology resource announcements · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Draft genome sequence ofMicrobiology resource announcements · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Additions toFungal systematics and evolution · 2022
    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

9 authors.

Sten AnslanInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Tartumaa, Estonia.ORCID 0000-0002-2299-454X
Vladimir MikryukovInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Tartumaa, Estonia.ORCID 0000-0003-2786-2690
Kęstutis ArmolaitisDepartment of Ecology, Institute of Forestry of Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry (LAMMC), Kaunas, Lithuania.
Jelena AnkudaDepartment of Ecology, Institute of Forestry of Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry (LAMMC), Kaunas, Lithuania.
Dagnija LazdinaLatvian State Forest Research Institute SILAVA, Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0001-8280-3912
Kristaps MakovskisLatvian State Forest Research Institute SILAVA, Riga, Latvia.
Lars VesterdalDepartment of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Inger Kappel SchmidtDepartment of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Leho TedersooInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Tartumaa, Estonia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the developments in DNA nanoball sequencing technologies and the emergence of new platforms, there is an increasing interest in their performance in comparison with the widely used sequencing-by-synthesis methods. Here, we test the consistency of metabarcoding results from DNBSEQ-G400RS (DNA nanoball sequencing platform by MGI-Tech) and NovaSeq 6000 (sequencing-by-synthesis platform by Illumina) platforms using technical replicates of DNA libraries that consist of COI gene amplicons from 120 soil DNA samples. By subjecting raw sequencing data from both platforms to a uniform bioinformatics processing, we found that the proportion of high-quality reads passing through the filtering steps was similar in both datasets. Per-sample operational taxonomic unit (OTU) and amplicon sequence variant (ASV) richness patterns were highly correlated, but sequencing data from DNBSEQ-G400RS harbored a higher number of OTUs. This may be related to the lower dominance of most common OTUs in DNBSEQ data set (thus revealing higher richness by detecting rare taxa) and/or to a lower effective read quality leading to generation of spurious OTUs. However, there was no statistical difference in the ASV and post-clustered ASV richness between platforms, suggesting that additional denoising step in the ASV workflow had effectively removed the 'noisy' reads. Both OTU-based and ASV-based composition were strongly correlated between the sequencing platforms, with essentially interchangeable results. Therefore, we conclude that DNBSEQ-G400RS and NovaSeq 6000 are both equally efficient high-throughput sequencing platforms to be utilized in studies aiming to apply the metabarcoding approach, but the main benefit of the former is related to lower sequencing cost.

Indexed as

COIDNBSEQIlluminaMetabarcodingMGI-TechNovaSeq

Identifiers

PMID34703674
PMCPMC8491618

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.