ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Influence of Sequencing Technology on Pangenome-level Analysis and Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance Genes in ESKAPE Pathogens.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As sequencing costs decrease, short-read and long-read technologies are indispensable tools for uncovering the genetic drivers behind bacterial pathogen resistance. This study explores the differences between the use of short-read (Illumina) and long-read (Oxford Nanopore Technologies, ONT) sequencing in detecting antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes in ESKAPE pathogens ( Impact Statement: This study provides a comprehensive comparison of short-read (Illumina) and long-read (Oxford Nanopore Technologies, ONT) sequencing technologies in the context of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) detection in ESKAPE pathogens. By analyzing a large dataset of 1,385 whole genome sequences, the research offers valuable insights into the strengths and limitations of each approach, as well as the benefits of the novel approach of hybrid assembly. These findings have broad utility across microbiology, genomics, and infectious disease research. In particular, they apply to the work of researchers and clinicians dealing with AMR surveillance, investigation into outbreaks, and bacterial genome analysis. Given the nuance with which technological differences in genomic completeness, pangenome structure, and AMR determinant detection have been explored in this study, it is a good basis for informed method selection for future research. While the output represents an incremental advance, its significance lies in its practical implications. It thus enables researchers to take more reasonable decisions in designing genomic studies of bacterial pathogens by showing the complementarity of various sequencing approaches and their specific strengths. This could lead to more accurate and comprehensive detection of AMR, which would contribute ultimately to improved antibiotic stewardship and public health strategies. Data Summary: The authors confirm all supporting data, code and protocols have been provided within the article or through supplementary data files. Repositories: All the sequences used for this study are publicly accessible from GenBank, and their individual IDs are disclosed in Supplementary Table 1.
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.