ArticleScientific reports2025
Leveraging illumina iSeq100 for whole genome sequencing of Salmonella Typhi for a resource-limited setting.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bacterial whole-genome-sequencing improves our understanding of epidemiology and pathogenesis of infections. It also allows comprehensive investigation on virulence, evolution and resistance mechanisms. Nepal, recently, has seen some increase in sequencing capabilities but faces hurdles for optimum utilisation. However, these hurdles could be alleviated with strategic use of available platforms. Therefore, this study aimed at performing and evaluating the whole-genome-sequencing of S Typhi using Illumina iSeq100. Six banked isolates of S Typhi were selected, extracted, confirmed by qPCR and then sequenced in Illumina iSeq100 at 200pM. The consensus was generated by mapping onto S. Typhi CT18. These consensus genomes and their coverage parameters were compared to data from HiSeq and NextSeq. The raw reads were also evaluated using pathogenwatch to observe genotype, mutations and resistance genes. The coverage parameters (breadth and depth) of the genomes from this study were compared to the same genomes sequenced using HiSeq/NextSeq. The average coverage breadth (96.81%) and depth (63.75x) of genomes sequenced in iSeq100 were comparable to that of HiSeq/NextSeq (breadth: 98.72% and depth: 69.87x). The genotypes detected, the number of SNPs and genetic determinants of AMR genes were identical across platforms. The data from bacterial whole-genome-sequencing using the iSeq100 is equally informative when compared to some high-end sequencers. Thus, this study advocates for optimum utlisation of available platforms such as iSeq100.
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.