Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39530915›Full record

ReviewEmerging infectious diseases2024

Metagenomic Nanopore Sequencing of Tickborne Pathogens, Mongolia.

Koray Ergunay, Bazartseren Boldbaatar, Brian P Bourke, Laura Caicedo-Quiroga, Cynthia L Tucker, Andrew G Letizia, Nora G Cleary, Abigail G Lilak, Guugandaa Nyamdavaa, Sharav Tumenjargal and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Emerging infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Nanopore sequencing in veterinary medicine: from concepts to clinical applications.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

12 authors.

Koray Ergunay
Bazartseren Boldbaatar
Brian P Bourke
Laura Caicedo-Quiroga
Cynthia L Tucker
Andrew G Letizia
Nora G Cleary
Abigail G Lilak
Guugandaa Nyamdavaa
Sharav Tumenjargal
Michael E von Fricken
Yvonne-Marie Linton

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We performed nanopore-based metagenomic screening on 885 ticks collected from 6 locations in Mongolia and divided the results into 68 samples: 23 individual samples and 45 pools of 2-12 tick samples each. We detected bacterial and parasitic pathogens Anaplasma ovis, Babesia microti, Coxiella burnetii, Borrelia miyamotoi, Francisella tularensis subsp. holarctica and novicida, Spiroplasma ixodetis, Theileria equi, and Rickettsia spp., including R. raoultii, R. slovaca, and R. canadensis. We identified the viral pathogens Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (2.9%), recently described Alongshan virus (ALSV) (2.9%), and Beiji nairovirus (5.8%). We assembled ALSV genomes, and maximum-likelihood analyses revealed clustering with viruses reported in humans and ticks from China. For ALSV, we identified surface glycoprotein markers associated with isolates from Asia viruses hosted by Ixodes persulcatus ticks. We also detected 20 virus species of unknown public health impact, including a near-complete Yanggou tick virus genome. Our findings demonstrate that nanopore sequencing can aid in detecting endemic and emerging tickborne pathogens.

Indexed as

MetagenomicsNanopore SequencingTick-Borne DiseasesTicksAnaplasmaAnimalsBabesia microtiBorreliaHemorrhagic Fever Virus, Crimean-CongoHumansMetagenomeMongoliaNairovirusPhylogenyRickettsiabacteriametagenomic sequencingMongoliaparasitestickborne illnessesvector-borne infectionsviruses

Identifiers

PMID39530915
PMCPMC11559569

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.