ArticleBMC methods2026
Automated workflow for genotyping individual transposon library variants.
Article in BMC methods, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The fields of genome engineering and synthetic biology rely on high-throughput screening to accelerate research and increase reproducibility. This often requires the use of costly equipment such as flow cytometers, specialized microfluidic devices or liquid handlers. Despite the availability of population-level screening methods, genotyping individual clones in transposon libraries remains a necessary but frequently labor-intensive task well suited for liquid-handling platforms. Although open-source automation is democratizing access to liquid handlers, it requires a minimum level of programming expertise or the availability of validated protocols to implement experimental workflows. To address these challenges, we present a step-by-step automated workflow designed for individual variant genotyping of transposon insertion libraries using an open-source OT-2 liquid handler and a custom Python package to annotate sequencing results. Methods: The automated protocol comprises six modular steps that can be used separately or integrated into different workflows: 1) colony picking into selective media, 2) counter-selection using the backbone and integrated antibiotic resistances and preparation of glycerol stocks pre-cultures, 3) colony counter-selection and 4) control PCR assays to filter spurious integration events, 5) arbitrary PCR assays and 6) sequencing and annotation using a custom Python package. This protocol is demonstrated using standardized vectors adhering to the Standard European Vector Architecture (SEVA) guidelines and standardized Lab Automation Protocol (LAP) scripts to ensure reproducibility and portability. Results: The automated workflow was validated using a transposon insertion library in Pseudomonas putida KT2440, enabling reliable genotyping of individual variants within 4-5 days. No spurious integrations were detected, and genomic insertion sites were successfully identified for 40 out of 46 variants, demonstrating robustness, accessibility, and scalability of the open-source workflow. Discussion: This automated workflow enables reliable genotyping while reducing hands-on time and minimizing human error. Its modular, standardized design and validated protocols promote protocol reuse and sharing while broadening access to open-source laboratory automation. While the throughput of the workflow is limited by the deck capacity of the liquid handler, it can be scaled by subsequent runs or parallel processing on multiple liquid handlers. In addition, the workflow can be further streamlined through integration of an OT-2 adapted colony picker. Overall, this open-source workflow provides a robust foundation for scalable and reproducible genotyping of individual variants in genome engineering and synthetic biology applications.
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.