Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39069530›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2024

Unveiling errors in soil microbial community sequencing: a case for reference soils and improved diagnostics for nanopore sequencing.

Daniel K Manter, Catherine L Reardon, Amanda J Ashworth, Abasiofiok M Ibekwe, R Michael Lehman, Jude E Maul, Daniel N Miller, Timothy Creed, Patrick M Ewing, Stanley Park and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

15 authors.

Daniel K Manter *Soil Management and Sugar Beet Research, United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), Fort Collins, CO, USA. daniel.manter@usda.gov.ORCID 0000-0001-7729-7197
Catherine L Reardon *Soil and Water Conservation Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Adams, OR, USA. catherine.reardon@usda.gov.ORCID 0000-0002-2195-1214
Amanda J AshworthPoultry Production and Product Safety Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Fayetteville, AR, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3218-8939
Abasiofiok M IbekweWater Efficiency and Salinity Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Riverside, CA, USA.
R Michael LehmanNorth Central Agricultural Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Brookings, SD, USA.
Jude E MaulSustainable Agricultural Systems Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD, USA.
Daniel N MillerAgroecosystem Management Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Lincoln, NE, USA.
Timothy CreedSoil Management and Sugar Beet Research, United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), Fort Collins, CO, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4510-1596
Patrick M EwingFood Systems Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Burlington, VT, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8515-1884
Stanley ParkWater Efficiency and Salinity Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Riverside, CA, USA.
Thomas F DuceyCoastal Plains Soil, Water and Plant Research Center, USDA-ARS, Florence, SC, USA.
Heather L TylerCrop Production Systems Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Stoneville, MS, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4467-2322
Kristen S VeumCropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Columbia, MO, USA.
Sharon L WeyersSoil Management Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Morris, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3873-7748
David B KnaebelFederal government retiree, Fayetteville, NY, USA.

Funding

United States Department of Agriculture | Agricultural Research Service (USDA Agricultural Research Service) 0500-00034-001-000-D
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sequencing platform and workflow strongly influence microbial community analyses through potential errors at each step. Effective diagnostics and experimental controls are needed to validate data and improve reproducibility. This cross-laboratory study evaluates sources of variability and error at three main steps of a standardized amplicon sequencing workflow (DNA extraction, polymerase chain reaction [PCR], and sequencing) using Oxford Nanopore MinION to analyze agricultural soils and a simple mock community. Variability in sequence results occurs at each step in the workflow with PCR errors and differences in library size greatly influencing diversity estimates. Common bioinformatic diagnostics and the mock community are ineffective at detecting PCR abnormalities. This work outlines several diagnostic checks and techniques to account for sequencing depth and ensure accuracy and reproducibility in soil community analyses. These diagnostics and the inclusion of a reference soil can help ensure data validity and facilitate the comparison of multiple sequencing runs within and between laboratories.

Indexed as

Nanopore SequencingSoil MicrobiologyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMicrobiotaPolymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of ResultsSequence Analysis, DNASoilSoil

Identifiers

PMID39069530
PMCPMC11284219

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.