ArticleBMC biology2025
Comparative evaluation of DNA and RNA probes for capture-based mitochondrial DNA next-generation sequencing.
Article in BMC biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Direct whole-genome sequencing of Coxiella burnetii from environmental samples using a two-step selective enrichment approach.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProbe-based liquid-phase hybridization capture is a powerful and commonly used approach for next-generation sequencing (NGS) of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). However, the performance difference between DNA and RNA probe-based capture strategies for mtDNA NGS remains to be determined, leading to the irrational interchangeable use in numerous studies.
resultsWe custom-designed DNA and RNA probes targeting the double-stranded mtDNA and optimized their hybridization conditions for capture-based mtDNA NGS in fresh tissue and plasma samples. Under optimal conditions, we systematically compared the performance of DNA and RNA probes in mtDNA detection. RNA probes demonstrated superior mtDNA enrichment efficiency, characterized by higher mtDNA mapping rates and greater average mtDNA depth per gigabyte of sequencing data. However, DNA probes were more effective at reducing artifacts caused by nuclear mitochondrial DNA segments (NUMTs) in mtDNA mutation detection at both the read and mutation levels. Additionally, RNA probes captured a broader fragment size distribution and higher prevalence of longer fragments in plasma cell-free mtDNA.
conclusionsThe systematic evaluation of DNA and RNA probes in capture-based mtDNA NGS provides valuable insights into their performance differences. These findings advocate for informed probe selection tailored to the specific experimental and clinical needs, ultimately advancing the field of mtDNA characterization and its applications in genomics and diagnostics.
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.