ArticleBMC genomics2026
Pathogen to read: a rapid, automated workflow for public health-ready microbial sequencing.
Article in BMC genomics, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNext Generation Sequencing (NGS) based microbial surveillance has become a critical tool for public health initiatives, providing insights into complex interactions within microbial communities. This understanding can be used to facilitate outbreak investigations, pathogen surveillance, and resistance prevention. However, current sample preparation methods are prone to human error and sample bias resulting in skewed Gram +/- coverages and low yields. Methods that have been optimized for non-bias extraction, like mechanical bead beating, are not easily integrated with automation, preventing widespread scalability. Here, we present an innovative, fully automated method that integrates enzymatic lysis, extraction, and library preparation in a single-operator, single-cartridge workflow. The workflow was designed to substantially reduce hands-on time and minimize Gram-stain-related biased extraction.
resultsA capillary-based liquid handler is leveraged to reduce hands-on time from 8 to 10 h to less than 45 min. Using mixed microbial communities, we demonstrated that the workflow consistently produces high-quality sequencing libraries with an average yield of 80.5 ng/µL, average quality score of 33.6, and using the ZymoBIOMICS Microbial Community Standard, a 2.46-fold improvement in Gram-positive representation relative to a standard lysis protocol.
conclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of a fully integrated capillary-based workflow combining enzymatic lysis, extraction, and library preparation compatible with low-throughput platforms. While automated NGS preparation systems exist, they predominantly rely on high-throughput liquid handling robotics, require separate equipment/workflows for extraction and library preparation, or do not support unified workflows for Gram-positive and Gram-negative extraction. The present approach addresses the low-throughput, cost-sensitive, rapid-turnaround requirements of public health and clinical microbiology settings. This proof-of-concept study demonstrates a fully automated workflow for microbial NGS sample preparation, benchmarked on a standardized mock community. This work offers a transformational engineering foundation with the potential to increase efficiency and reproducibility of pathogen genomics workflows, enabling faster outbreak detection and more comprehensive surveillance programs.
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.