ArticlePloS one2024
Exploring the potential of Oxford Nanopore Technologies sequencing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis sequencing: An assessment of R10 flowcells and V14 chemistry.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of DNA extraction methods from clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis primary liquid culture for whole-genome sequencing.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Decoding bacterial methylomes in four public health-relevant microbial species: nanopore sequencing enables reproducible analysis of DNA modifications.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Nanopore versus Illumina to study the gut bacterial diversity of sows and piglets between farms with high and low health status.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore sequencing data quality for Clostridioides difficile genome analysis and their application for epidemiological surveillance.BMC genomics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) sequencing is a promising technology. We assessed the performance of the new ONT R10 flowcells and V14 rapid sequencing chemistry for Mtb whole genome sequencing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) DNA extracted from clinical primary liquid cultures (CPLCs). Using the recommended protocols for MinION Mk1C, R10.4.1 MinION flowcells, and the ONT Rapid Sequencing Kit V14 on six CPLC samples, we obtained a pooled library yield of 10.9 ng/μl, generated 1.94 Gb of sequenced bases and 214k reads after 48h in a first sequencing run. Only half (49%) of all generated reads met the Phred Quality score threshold (>8). To assess if the low data output and sequence quality were due to impurities present in DNA extracted directly from CPLCs, we added a pre-library preparation bead-clean-up step and included purified DNA obtained from an Mtb subculture as a control sample in a second sequencing run. The library yield for DNA extracted from four CPLCs and one Mtb subculture (control) was similar (10.0 ng/μl), 2.38 Gb of bases and 822k reads were produced. The quality was slightly better with 66% of the produced reads having a Phred Quality >8. A third run of DNA from six CPLCs with bead clean-up pre-processing produced a low library yield (±1 Gb of bases, 166k reads) of low quality (51% of reads with a Phred Quality score >8). A median depth of coverage above 10× was only achieved for five of 17 (29%) sequenced libraries. Compared to Illumina WGS of the same samples, accurate lineage predictions and full drug resistance profiles from the generated ONT data could not be determined by TBProfiler. Further optimization of the V14 ONT rapid sequencing chemistry and library preparation protocol is needed for clinical Mtb WGS applications.
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.