ArticlePloS one2025
SARS-CoV-2 sequencing artifacts associated with targeted PCR enrichment and read mapping.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification and masking of artifactual and misleading within-host variants in deep-sequencing SARS-CoV-2 data.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- How benchmarking of bioinformatics tools is essential for informed workflow selection: a case study on SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNA detection.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protocols and pipelines for SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing were rapidly established when the COVID-19 outbreak was declared a pandemic. The most widely used approach for sequencing SARS-CoV-2 includes targeted enrichment by PCR, followed by shotgun sequencing and reference-based genome assembly. As the continued surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 worldwide is transitioning towards a lower level of intensity, it is timely to re-visit the sequencing protocols and pipelines established during the acute phase of the pandemic. In the current study, we have investigated the impact of primer scheme and reference genome choice by sequencing samples with multiple primer schemes (Artic V3, V4.1 and V5.3.2) and re-processing reads with multiple reference genomes. We have also analysed the temporal development in ambiguous base calls during the emergence of the BA.2.86.x variant. We found that the primers used for targeted enrichment can result in recurrent ambiguous base calls, which can accumulate rapidly in response to the emergence of a new variant. We also found examples of consistent base calling errors, associated with PCR artifacts and amplicon drop-out. Similarly, misalignments and partially mapped reads on the reference genome resulted in ambiguous base calls, as well as defining mutations being omitted from the assembly. These findings highlight some key limitations of using targeted enrichment by PCR and reference-based genome assembly for sequencing SARS-CoV-2, and the importance of continuously monitoring and updating primer schemes and bioinformatic pipelines.
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.