ArticleGenomics & informatics2023
Comparative analysis of HiSeq3000 and BGISEQ-500 sequencing platform over whole genome sequencing metagenomics data.
Article in Genomics & informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Next-generation sequencing: Driving a paradigm shift from pathogen detection to systems-level analysis.Infectious medicine · 2026Article
- Mechanism of sepsis regulation by ELANE via macrophage polarization.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in sequencing technologies and platforms have enabled to generate metagenomics sequences using different sequencing platforms. In this study, we analyzed and compared shotgun metagenomic sequences generated by HiSeq3000 and BGISEQ-500 platforms from 12 sediment samples collected across the Norwegian coast. Metagenomics DNA sequences were normalized to an equal number of bases for both platforms and further evaluated by using different taxonomic classifiers, reference databases, and assemblers. Normalized BGISEQ-500 sequences retained more reads and base counts after preprocessing, while a slightly higher fraction of HiSeq3000 sequences were taxonomically classified. Kaiju classified a higher percentage of reads relative to Kraken2 for both platforms, and comparison of reference database for taxonomic classification showed that MAR database outperformed RefSeq. Assembly using MEGAHIT produced longer assemblies and higher total contigs count in majority of HiSeq3000 samples than using metaSPAdes, but the assembly statistics notably improved with unprocessed or normalized reads. Our results indicate that both platforms perform comparably in terms of the percentage of taxonomically classified reads and assembled contig statistics for metagenomics samples. This study provides valuable insights for researchers in selecting an appropriate sequencing platform and bioinformatics pipeline for their metagenomics studies.
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.