ArticleISME communications2025
Validating digital polymerase chain reaction for 16S rRNA gene amplification from low biomass environmental samples.
Article in ISME communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Portable Dual-Mode Microfluidic Device Integrating RT-qPCR and RT-LAMP for Rapid Nucleic Acid Detection in Point-of-Care Testing.Biosensors · 2026Article
- Sampling method influences hemolymph bacterial communities in the eastern oyster,Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Development of a novel duplex crystal digital PCR for the detection of PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital polymerase chain reaction (dPCR) is a DNA quantification technology that offers absolute quantification of DNA templates. In this study, we optimized and validated a chip-based dPCR EvaGreen assay with commonly used 16S rRNA gene primer pairs and compared its performance to quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). We compared measurements of low amounts of template DNA using a newly designed synthetic DNA standard to assess precision, accuracy, and sensitivity. Optimization approaches were tested to minimize partitions with intermediate fluorescence levels between true positive and true negative partitions (so-called "rain") for dPCR. Both dPCR and qPCR demonstrated similar quantification performance, with variability in accuracy increasing for samples containing fewer than 30 copies μl
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.