Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39298196›Full record

ArticleMicrobial genomics2024

Evaluation of commercial RNA extraction kits for long-read metatranscriptomics in soil.

Daniel G Barber, Christian A Davies, Iain P Hartley, Richard K Tennant

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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 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. Article
  4. Review
  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

4 authors.

Daniel G BarberGeography, Faculty of Environment, Science and Economy, Amory Building, Rennes Drive, Exeter, Devon, EX4 4RJ, UK.
Christian A DaviesShell International Exploration and Production Inc., Shell Technology Centre Houston, Houston, TX, 77082, USA.
Iain P HartleyGeography, Faculty of Environment, Science and Economy, Amory Building, Rennes Drive, Exeter, Devon, EX4 4RJ, UK.
Richard K TennantGeography, Faculty of Environment, Science and Economy, Amory Building, Rennes Drive, Exeter, Devon, EX4 4RJ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metatranscriptomic analysis of the soil microbiome has the potential to reveal molecular mechanisms that drive soil processes regulated by the microbial community. Therefore, RNA samples must be of sufficient yield and quality to robustly quantify differential gene expression. While short-read sequencing technology is often favoured for metatranscriptomics, long-read sequencing has the potential to provide several benefits over short-read technologies. The ability to resolve complete transcripts on a portable sequencing platform for a relatively low capital expenditure makes Oxford Nanopore Technology an attractive prospect for addressing many of the challenges of soil metatranscriptomics. To fully enable long-read metatranscriptomic analysis of the functional molecular pathways expressed in these diverse habitats, RNA purification methods from soil must be optimised for long-read sequencing. Here we compare RNA samples purified using five commercially available extraction kits designed for use with soil. We found that the Qiagen RNeasy PowerSoil Total RNA Kit performed the best across RNA yield, quality and purity and was robust across different soil types. We found that sufficient sequencing depth can be achieved to characterise the active community for total RNA samples using Oxford Nanopore Technology, and discuss its current limitations for differential gene expression analysis in soil studies.

Indexed as

Soil MicrobiologyGene Expression ProfilingHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMetagenomicsMicrobiotaRNARNA, BacterialSequence Analysis, RNASoilTranscriptomeRNARNA, BacterialSoilkit comparisonmetatranscriptomicsmicrobiomeOxford NanoporeRNAsoil

Identifiers

PMID39298196
PMCPMC11412367

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.