ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
A comparison of short- and long-read whole genome sequencing for microbial pathogen epidemiology.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Whole genome sequencing provides the highest resolution for characterizing pathogen evolution, epidemiology, and diagnostics. Genome assemblies contain information on the identity and potential phenotypes of a pathogen. Likewise, variant calling can inform on transmission patterns and evolutionary relationships. Recent improvements in Oxford Nanopore long-read sequencing have made its use attractive for genomic epidemiology. However, the accuracy and optimal strategy for analysis of Nanopore reads remains to be determined. We compared the use of Illumina short reads and Oxford Nanopore long reads for genome assembly and variant calling of phytopathogenic bacteria. We generated short- and long-read datasets for diverse phytopathogenic
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.