ArticleMolecular ecology resources2025
Wet Lab Protocols Matter: Choice of DNA Extraction and Library Preparation Protocols Bias Ancient Oral Microbiome Recovery.
Article in Molecular ecology resources, 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.
- Comparing the Performance of Double-Stranded and Single-Stranded DNA Libraries for Ancient Oral Microbiome Reconstruction.Molecular ecology resources · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ancient DNA (aDNA) analysis of archaeological dental calculus has provided a wealth of insights into ancient health, demography and lifestyles. However, the workflow for ancient metagenomics is still evolving, raising concerns about reproducibility. Few systematic investigations have examined how DNA extraction methods and library preparation protocols influence ancient oral microbiome recovery, despite evidence from modern populations suggesting that they do. This leaves a gap in our understanding of how wet-lab protocols impact aDNA recovery from dental calculus. In this study, we apply two DNA extraction and two library preparation methods in the aDNA field on dental calculus samples from Hungary and Niger. Samples from each context have similar chronological ages, but differences in their levels of aDNA preservation are notable, providing additional insights into how the efficacy of wet-lab protocols is impacted by sample preservation. Several metrics were employed to assess intra- and inter-sample variability, such as DNA fragment length recovery, GC content, clonality, endogenous content, DNA deamination and microbial composition. Our findings indicate that both DNA extraction and library preparation protocols can considerably impact ancient DNA recovery from archaeological dental calculus. Furthermore, no single protocol consistently outperformed the others across all assessments, and the effectiveness of specific protocol combinations depended on the preservation of the sample. These findings highlight the challenges of meta-analyses and underscore the need to account for technical variability. Lastly, our study raises the question of whether the field should strive to standardise methods for comparability or optimise protocols based on sample preservation and specific research objectives.
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.