Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39843557›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Evaluating the efficiency of 16S-ITS-23S operon sequencing for species level resolution in microbial communities.

Meghana Srinivas, Calum J Walsh, Fiona Crispie, Orla O'Sullivan, Paul D Cotter, Douwe van Sinderen, John G Kenny

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Systematic Review: Long-Read Sequencing in Algal Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Microbial genomics · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Environmental Compatibility ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors.

Meghana SrinivasTeagasc Food Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.
Calum J WalshDoherty Applied Microbial Genomics, Department of Microbiology & Immunology, The University of Melbourne at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection & Immunity, 792 Elizabeth Street, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Fiona CrispieTeagasc Food Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.
Orla O'SullivanTeagasc Food Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.
Paul D CotterTeagasc Food Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.
Douwe van SinderenSchool of Microbiology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
John G KennyTeagasc Food Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland. john.kenny@teagasc.ie.

Funding

Science Foundation Ireland, APC Microbiome SFI/12/RC/2273_P2Science Foundation Ireland, VistaMilk SFI/16/RC/3835Teagasc Walsh Scholar Scheme 2020018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid advancements in long-read sequencing have facilitated species-level microbial profiling through full-length 16S rRNA sequencing (~ 1500 bp), and more notably, by the newer 16S-ITS-23S ribosomal RNA operon (RRN) sequencing (~ 4500 bp). RRN sequencing is emerging as a superior method for species resolution, exceeding the capabilities of short-read and full-length 16S rRNA sequencing. However, being in its early stages of development, RRN sequencing has several underexplored or understudied elements, highlighting the need for a critical and thorough examination of its methodologies. Key areas that require detailed analysis include understanding how primer pairs, sequencing platforms, and classifiers and databases affect the accuracy of species resolution achieved through RRN sequencing. Our study addresses these gaps by evaluating the effect of primer pairs using four RRN primer combinations, and that of sequencing platforms by employing PacBio and Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) systems. Furthermore, two classification methods (Minimap2 and OTU clustering), in combination with four RRN reference databases (MIrROR, rrnDB, and two versions of GROND) were compared to identify consistent and accurate classification methods with RRN sequencing. Here we demonstrate that RRN primer pair choice and sequencing platform do not substantially bias taxonomic profiles for most of the tested mock communities, while classification methods significantly impact the accuracy of species-level assignments. Of the classification methods tested, Minimap2 classifier in combination with the GROND database most consistently provided accurate species-level classification across the communities tested, irrespective of sequencing platform.

Indexed as

BacteriaMicrobiotaOperonRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 23SrRNA OperonSequence Analysis, DNAHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingPhylogenyRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 23S16S-ITS-23S16S rRNA sequencinglong-read sequencingOxford Nanopore Technology (ONT)PacBioRRN operon

Identifiers

PMID39843557
PMCPMC11754871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.