ArticleMicrobial genomics2024
The long and short of it: benchmarking viromics using Illumina, Nanopore and PacBio sequencing technologies.
Article in Microbial genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nanopore Sequencing for Chikungunya Virus: Principles and Application.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027Article
- Comparison of nanopore sequencing, MethylationEPIC array, and EM-Seq for DNA methylation detection.Computational biology and chemistry · 2026Article
- Understanding Basic Concepts of Viral Quasispecies: From Evolutionary Dynamics to Clinical Relevance.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Same-day tagmentation PCR-based whole genome sequencing of bacteriophage genomes from a single plaque without DNA extraction.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Characterization and evaluation of a phage cocktail targeting Salmonella enterica in a Turkey farm.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Veterinary Herpesviruses: Experimental Tools for Transcriptomics and Neuroscience.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Comparison of whole genome sequencing approaches for Capripox viruses.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Clinical metagenomics for diagnosis and surveillance of viral pathogens.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026Review
- Metagenomic next-generation sequencing: new horizons in microbiology.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- Microbiome modulation for sustainable crop production and climate resilience.Sustainable microbiology · 2026Review
- Limited consensus of marine viral diversity observed across techniques.Environmental microbiome · 2025Article
- The Human Respiratory Virome in Health and Disease: Interactions, Dysbiosis, and Methodological Challenges.Advanced genetics (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Review
- A hitchhiker's guide to modern, practical cyanobacterial taxonomy.Journal of phycology · 2025Article
- Adaptive sampling with Oxford Nanopore offers a simple way to improve the efficiency of plant metagenomic studies.The New phytologist · 2025Article
- Opportunities and Challenges of Multiomics for Discovery and Monitoring of Human Pathogens.Environment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Review
- Exploring the Virome of Nile Tilapia (Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Aggregated Gut Viral Catalogue (AVrC): A unified resource for exploring the viral diversity of the human gut.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Short-Read and Long-Read Whole Genome Sequencing for SARS-CoV-2 Variants Identification.Viruses · 2025Article
- Article
- Complementary insights into gut viral genomes: a comparative benchmark of short- and long-read metagenomes using diverse assemblers and binners.Microbiome · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Viral metagenomics has fuelled a rapid change in our understanding of global viral diversity and ecology. Long-read sequencing and hybrid assembly approaches that combine long- and short-read technologies are now being widely implemented in bacterial genomics and metagenomics. However, the use of long-read sequencing to investigate viral communities is still in its infancy. While Nanopore and PacBio technologies have been applied to viral metagenomics, it is not known to what extent different technologies will impact the reconstruction of the viral community. Thus, we constructed a mock bacteriophage community of previously sequenced phage genomes and sequenced them using Illumina, Nanopore and PacBio sequencing technologies and tested a number of different assembly approaches. When using a single sequencing technology, Illumina assemblies were the best at recovering phage genomes. Nanopore- and PacBio-only assemblies performed poorly in comparison to Illumina in both genome recovery and error rates, which both varied with the assembler used. The best Nanopore assembly had errors that manifested as SNPs and INDELs at frequencies 41 and 157 % higher than found in Illumina only assemblies, respectively. While the best PacBio assemblies had SNPs at frequencies 12 and 78 % higher than found in Illumina-only assemblies, respectively. Despite high-read coverage, long-read-only assemblies recovered a maximum of one complete genome from any assembly, unless reads were down-sampled prior to assembly. Overall the best approach was assembly by a combination of Illumina and Nanopore reads, which reduced error rates to levels comparable with short-read-only assemblies. When using a single technology, Illumina only was the best approach. The differences in genome recovery and error rates between technology and assembler had downstream impacts on gene prediction, viral prediction, and subsequent estimates of diversity within a sample. These findings will provide a starting point for others in the choice of reads and assembly algorithms for the analysis of viromes.
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.