ArticleMicrobiome2024
A single-stranded based library preparation method for virome characterization.
Article in Microbiome, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Optimizing methods for virome analysis based on studies of a synthetic viral community.mSystems · 2026Article
- DNA Viral Size Fraction Metagenomics for Human Stool Samples.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2026Article
- DNA extraction and virome processing methods strongly influence recovered human gut viral community characteristics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Optimizing methods for virome analysis based on studies of a synthetic viral community.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Assessing Bias and Reproducibility of Viral Metagenomics Methods for the Combined Detection of Faecal RNA and DNA Viruses.Viruses · 2025Article
- Gut-Microbiome Interactions: Characterization, Therapeutic Implications and Machine Learning.Sage open pathologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe gut virome is an integral component of the gut microbiome, playing a crucial role in maintaining gut health. However, accurately depicting the entire gut virome is challenging due to the inherent diversity of genome types (dsDNA, ssDNA, dsRNA, and ssRNA) and topologies (linear, circular, or fragments), with subsequently biases associated with current sequencing library preparation methods. To overcome these problems and improve reproducibility and comparability across studies, universal or standardized virome sequencing library construction methods are highly needed in the gut virome study.
resultsWe repurposed the ligation-based single-stranded library (SSLR) preparation method for virome studies. We demonstrate that the SSLR method exhibits exceptional efficiency in quantifying viral DNA genomes (both dsDNA and ssDNA) and outperforms existing double-stranded (Nextera) and single-stranded (xGen, MDA + Nextera) library preparation approaches in terms of minimal amplification bias, evenness of coverage, and integrity of assembling viral genomes. The SSLR method can be utilized for the simultaneous library preparation of both DNA and RNA viral genomes. Furthermore, the SSLR method showed its ability to capture highly modified phage genomes, which were often lost using other library preparation approaches.
conclusionWe introduce and improve a fast, simple, and efficient ligation-based single-stranded DNA library preparation for gut virome study. This method is compatible with Illumina sequencing platforms and only requires ligation reagents within 3-h library preparation, which is similar or even better than the advanced library preparation method (xGen). We hope this method can be further optimized, validated, and widely used to make gut virome study more comparable and reproducible. Video Abstract.
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.