Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40006910›Full record

ArticleViruses2025

Assessing Bias and Reproducibility of Viral Metagenomics Methods for the Combined Detection of Faecal RNA and DNA Viruses.

Rik Haagmans, Oliver J Charity, Dave Baker, Andrea Telatin, George M Savva, Evelien M Adriaenssens, Penny P Powell, Simon R Carding

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Viruses, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Viral metagenomic analysis of fecal samples fromFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    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

8 authors.

Rik HaagmansFood, Microbiome, and Health Research Programme, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7UQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2090-6056
Oliver J CharityFood, Microbiome, and Health Research Programme, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7UQ, UK.
Dave BakerCore Science Resources, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich NR4 7UQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2126-7436
Andrea TelatinCore Science Resources, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich NR4 7UQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7619-281X
George M SavvaCore Science Resources, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich NR4 7UQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9190-124X
Evelien M AdriaenssensFood, Microbiome, and Health Research Programme, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7UQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4826-5406
Penny P PowellNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5347-0490
Simon R CardingFood, Microbiome, and Health Research Programme, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7UQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2383-9701

Funding

BBSRC BB/CCG1860/1BBSRC BB/R012490/1BBSRC BB/X011011/1BBSRC BB/X011054/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/CCG1860/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R012490/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR10353Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR10355Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR10356Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR13631Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR13633Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR13634Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR13635Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR13636Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/X011054/1Invest in ME Research PhD studentshipME Research UK Project GrantUEA Faculty Medicine and Health PhD studentship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole transcriptome amplification (WTA2) and sequence-independent single primer amplification (SISPA) are two widely used methods for combined metagenomic sequencing of RNA and DNA viruses. However, information on the reproducibility and bias of these methods on diverse viruses in faecal samples is currently lacking. A mock community (MC) of diverse viruses was developed and used to spike faecal samples at different concentrations. Virus-like particles (VLPs) were extracted, nucleic acid isolated, reverse-transcribed, and PCR amplified using either WTA2 or SISPA and sequenced for metagenomic analysis. A bioinformatics pipeline measured the recovery of MC viruses in replicates of faecal samples from three human donors, analysing the consistency of viral abundance measures and taxonomy. Viruses had different recovery levels with VLP extraction introducing variability between replicates, while WTA2 and SISPA produced comparable results. In comparing WTA2- and SISPA-generated libraries, WTA2 gave more uniform coverage depth profiles and improved assembly quality and virus identification. SISPA produced more consistent abundance, with a 50% difference between replicates occurring in ~20% and ~10% of sequences for WTA2 and SISPA, respectively. In conclusion, a bioinformatics pipeline has been developed to assess the methodological variability and bias of WTA2 and SISPA, demonstrating higher sensitivity with WTA2 and higher consistency with SISPA.

Indexed as

DNA VirusesFecesMetagenomicsRNA VirusesComputational BiologyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesReproducibility of Resultsbacteriophageseukaryotic virusesmock communityviral metagenomics

Identifiers

PMID40006910
PMCPMC11860243

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.