Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35388078›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Comparison of rRNA depletion methods for efficient bacterial mRNA sequencing.

Anika Wahl, Christopher Huptas, Klaus Neuhaus

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Compendium of RNA modifications for bacterial stress adaptation.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. SenescentMicroorganisms · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Protocol for Efficient Ribodepletion of Euglena gracilis RNA.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Low-volumeMicrobial genomics · 2025
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anika WahlCore Facility Microbiome, ZIEL - Institute for Food and Health, Technische Universität München, Weihenstephaner Berg 3, 85354, Freising, Germany.
Christopher HuptasChair for Microbial Ecology, Technische Universität München, Weihenstephaner Berg 3, 85354, Freising, Germany.
Klaus NeuhausCore Facility Microbiome, ZIEL - Institute for Food and Health, Technische Universität München, Weihenstephaner Berg 3, 85354, Freising, Germany. neuhaus@tum.de.
Technical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current methods of high-throughput RNA sequencing of prokaryotes, including transcriptome analysis or ribosomal profiling, need deep sequencing to achieve sufficient numbers of effective reads (e.g., mapping to mRNA) in order to also find weakly expressed genetic elements. The fraction of high-quality reads mapping to coding RNAs (i.e., mRNA) is mainly influenced by the large content of rRNA and, to a lesser extent, tRNA in total RNA. Thus, depletion of rRNA increases coverage and thus sequencing costs. RiboZero, a depletion kit based on probe hybridisation and rRNA-removal was found to be most efficient in the past, but it was discontinued in 2018. To facilitate comparability with previous experiments and to help choose adequate replacements, we compare three commercially available rRNA depletion kits also based on hybridization and magnetic beads, i.e., riboPOOLs, RiboMinus and MICROBExpress, with the former RiboZero. Additionally, we constructed biotinylated probes for magnetic bead capture and rRNA depletion in this study. Based on E. coli, we found similar efficiencies in rRNA depletion for riboPOOLs and the self-made depletion method; both comparable to the former RiboZero, followed by RiboMinus, succeeded by MICROBExpress. Further, our in-house protocol allows customized species-specific rRNA or even tRNA depletion or depletion of other RNA targets. Both, the self-made biotinylated probes and riboPOOLs, were most successful in reducing the rRNA content and thereby increasing sequencing depth concerning mRNA reads. Additionally, the number of reads matching to weakly expressed genes are increased. In conclusion, the self-made specific biotinylated probes and riboPOOLs are an adequate replacement for the former RiboZero. Both are very efficient in depleting rRNAs, increasing mRNA reads and thus sequencing efficiency.

Indexed as

Escherichia coliRNA, RibosomalBacteriaHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingRNARNA, MessengerSequence Analysis, RNARNARNA, MessengerRNA, Ribosomal

Identifiers

PMID35388078
PMCPMC8986838
OpenAlexW4223635887

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.