Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38015952›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Field-based detection of bacteria using nanopore sequencing: Method evaluation for biothreat detection in complex samples.

Andrea D Tyler, Jane McAllister, Helen Stapleton, Penny Gauci, Kym Antonation, David Thirkettle-Watts, Cindi R Corbett

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Andrea D TylerNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.ORCID 0009-0007-2440-8819
Jane McAllisterDepartment of Defence, Defence Science and Technology Group, Fishermans Bend, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Helen StapletonDefence Science and Technology Laboratory, Dstl Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire, United Kingdom.
Penny GauciDepartment of Defence, Defence Science and Technology Group, Fishermans Bend, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Kym AntonationNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
David Thirkettle-WattsDepartment of Defence, Defence Science and Technology Group, Fishermans Bend, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Cindi R CorbettNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From pathogen detection to genome or plasmid closure, the utility of the Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) MinION for microbiological analysis has been well documented. The MinION's small footprint, portability, and real-time analytic capability situates it well to address challenges in the field of unbiased pathogen detection, as a component of a security investigation. To this end, a multicenter evaluation of the effect of alternative analytical approaches on the outcome of MinION-based sequencing, using a set of well-characterized samples, was explored in a field-based scenario. Three expert scientific response groups evaluated known bacterial DNA extracts as part of an international first responder (Chemical, Biological, Radiological) training exercise. Samples were prepared independently for analysis using the Rapid and/or Rapid PCR sequencing kits as per the best practices of each of the participating groups. Analyses of sequence data were in turn conducted using varied approaches including ONTs What's in my pot (WIMP) architecture and in-house computational pipelines. Microbial community composition and the ability of each approach to detect pathogens was compared. Each group demonstrated the ability to detect all species present in samples, although several organisms were detected at levels much lower than expected with some organisms even falling below 1% abundance. Several 'contaminant' near neighbor species were also detected, at low abundance. Regardless of the sequencing approach chosen, the observed composition of the bacterial communities diverged from the input composition in each of the analyses, although sequencing conducted using the rapid kit produced the least distortion when compared to PCR-based library preparation methods. One of the participating groups generated drastically lower sequencing output than the other groups, likely attributed to the limited computer hard drive capacity, and occasional disruption of the internet connection. These results provide further consideration for conducting unbiased pathogen identification within a field setting using MinION sequencing. However, the benefits of this approach in providing rapid results and unbiased detection must be considered along with the complexity of sample preparation and data analytics, when compared to more traditional methods. When utilized by trained scientific experts, with appropriate computational resources, the MinION sequencing device is a useful tool for field-based pathogen detection in mixed samples.

Indexed as

NanoporesNanopore SequencingBacteriaGene LibraryGenomeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID38015952
PMCPMC10684088

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.