ArticleScientific reports2022
DNA read count calibration for single-molecule, long-read sequencing.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Growth Phase-Related DNA Methylation and Localized DNA Fragment Density Variation inEpigenomes · 2026Article
- Quantifying DNA point mutations in commercially available AAV reporter vectors and plasmids.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2025Article
- Biases from Oxford Nanopore library preparation kits and their effects on microbiome and genome analysis.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Challenges in identifying mRNA transcript starts and ends from long-read sequencing data.Genome research · 2024Review
- Development of a portable on-site applicable metagenomic data generation workflow for enhanced pathogen and antimicrobial resistance surveillance.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are many applications in which quantitative information about DNA mixtures with different molecular lengths is important. Gene therapy vectors are much longer than can be sequenced individually via short-read NGS. However, vector preparations may contain smaller DNAs that behave differently during sequencing. We have used two library preparations each for Pacific Biosystems (PacBio) and Oxford Nanopore Technologies NGS to determine their suitability for quantitative assessment of varying sized DNAs. Equimolar length standards were generated from E. coli genomic DNA. Both PacBio library preparations provided a consistent length dependence though with a complex pattern. This method is sufficiently sensitive that differences in genomic copy number between DNA from E. coli grown in exponential and stationary phase conditions could be detected. The transposase-based Oxford Nanopore library preparation provided a predictable length dependence, but the random sequence starts caused the loss of original length information. The ligation-based approach retained length information but read frequency was more variable. Modeling of E. coli versus lambda read frequency via cubic spline smoothing showed that the shorter genome could be used as a suitable internal spike-in for DNAs in the 200 bp to 10 kb range, allowing meaningful QC to be carried out with AAV preparations.
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.