Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40842827›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2025

Comparative evaluation of sequencing platforms: Pacific Biosciences, Oxford Nanopore Technologies, and Illumina for 16S rRNA-based soil microbiome profiling.

Vladimir Veselovsky, Mikhail Romanov, Polina Zoruk, Andrey Larin, Vladislav Babenko, Maxim Morozov, Aleksandra Strokach, Natalia Zakharevich, Sadokatkhon Khamidova, Albina Danilova and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Microbial genomics · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Comparison of Different Methods of Molecular Detection ofCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

19 authors.

Vladimir Veselovsky *Lopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Mikhail Romanov *Lopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Polina ZorukLopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Andrey LarinLopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Vladislav BabenkoLopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Maxim MorozovLopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Aleksandra StrokachLopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Natalia ZakharevichLopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Sadokatkhon KhamidovaLopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Albina DanilovaSiberian Federal Research Center of Agrobiotechnology RAS, Krasnoobsk, Russia.
Aleksey VatlinInstitute of Ecology, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, Russia.
Vsevolod PavshintsevInstitute of Ecology, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, Russia.
Feng ChenguangInstitute of Ecology, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, Russia.
Denis TsybizovInstitute of Ecology, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, Russia.
Nikita MitkinCollagel LLC, Moscow, Russia.
Olesya GalanovaMoscow Center for Advanced Studies, Moscow, Russia.
Alexander ZakharenkoSiberian Federal Research Center of Agrobiotechnology RAS, Krasnoobsk, Russia.
Kirill GolokhvastSiberian Federal Research Center of Agrobiotechnology RAS, Krasnoobsk, Russia.
Ksenia KliminaLopukhin Federal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-Chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Soil microbiome profiling is crucial for understanding microbial diversity and its roles in ecosystem functioning and agricultural productivity. Recent advancements in high-throughput sequencing, particularly Pacific Biosciences (PacBio) and Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT), offer long-read sequencing capabilities that enhance microbial community analysis. In this study, we performed a comparative evaluation of 16S rRNA gene sequencing using Illumina (V4 and V3-V4 regions), PacBio (full-length and trimmed V3-V4/V4 regions), and ONT (full-length) to assess bacterial diversity in soil microbiomes. We analyzed three distinct soil types and applied standardized bioinformatics pipelines tailored to each platform. To ensure comparability, sequencing depth was normalized across platforms (10,000, 20,000, 25,000, and 35,000 reads per sample). Our results demonstrated that ONT and PacBio provided comparable bacterial diversity assessments, with PacBio showing slightly higher efficiency in detecting low-abundance taxa. Despite differences in sequencing accuracy, ONT produced results that closely matched those of PacBio, suggesting that ONT's inherent sequencing errors do not significantly affect the interpretation of well-represented taxa. Our study demonstrated that, regardless of the sequencing technology used and the choice of the target region (full-length 16S rRNA gene or its regions), microbial community analysis ensures clear clustering of samples based on soil type. The only exception is the V4 region, where no soil-type clustering is observed (

Indexed as

environmental samplefull-length 16S rRNA sequencingIlluminaOxford Nanoporesequencing platform comparisonsoil microbiomeV3–V4 and V4 regionsPacBio

Identifiers

PMID40842827
PMCPMC12365774

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.