ArticleApplied microbiology and biotechnology2026
Evaluation of targeted Massively Parallel Sequencing methods for forensic metagenomics.
Article in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Massively Parallel Sequencing (MPS) is effective for monitoring the microbial composition of environmental samples. Soil microbial signatures are critical for pinpointing the geographic location of forensic evidence, but standard 16S rRNA methods lack species-level resolution. Targeted sequencing panels, consisting of informative DNA fragments, can overcome this shortcoming and are highly desirable for forensic investigations. To address this, we evaluated three target enrichment methods for metagenomic analysis. First, we used Whole Metagenome Sequencing (WMS) data from 134 soil samples across 46 locations in Poland to extract a set of 200 markers. Using these markers, we created prototype targeted sequencing panels to compare two amplicon capture-based methods (Thermo Fisher AmpliSeq™ and Integrated DNA Technologies xGen™) and one hybridization capture-based method (Roche KAPA HyperPlus). The comparison of the technologies was guided by the results of classification of sample origin by machine learning classifier trained on feature profiles from WMS. The methods were assessed on technical parameters including data quality, reproducibility, sensitivity, and practical implementation for forensic laboratories. The performance and precision varied depending on technology and DNA concentration. The Roche KAPA HyperPlus hybridization capture-based method consistently demonstrated superior performance. Across various DNA input quantities, it showed the highest correlation with WMS data and achieved an exceptional F1 score of 0.94 at 5 ng, significantly outperforming the amplicon-based methods. This indicates that hybridization capture is a more robust and accurate approach for forensic soil microbiome profiling, particularly for low-template evidence, providing a highly reliable tool for predicting geographic origin. KEY POINTS: • Targeted Massively Parallel Sequencing methods for forensic soil microbial analysis • Targeted sequencing allowed the determination of the place of origin of soil samples • Roche KAPA HyperPlus: the most accurate classification of the soil samples origin.
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.