Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42788721›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2026

Comparative evaluation of two high-throughput qPCR systems for environmental and clinical microbiology applications.

Hao Wang, Satoshi Ishii

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hao WangBioTechnology Institute, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5468-786X
Satoshi IshiiBioTechnology Institute, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3600-9165

Funding

National Science Foundation (NSF) CBET 1916025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-throughput quantitative PCR (HT-qPCR) is useful for the simultaneous quantification of various genes, such as microbial source tracking (MST) markers, fecal indicator bacteria, pathogens, and antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) for environmental and clinical studies. While multiple HT-qPCR platforms are commercially available, their performance has rarely been directly compared. In this study, we evaluated and compared two commonly used HT-qPCR platforms, the Takara Bio SmartChip and the Standard BioTools Biomark HD system, using TaqMan probe-based MST assays and intercalating dye-based ARG assays. Despite differences in sample preparation workflows and reaction volumes, the two platforms produced the same detection results for 94.3% of MST sample × assay combinations, and 87.4% of ARG sample × assay combinations. Because HT-qPCR reactions are performed at nanoliter volumes (6.7-100 nL), a specific target amplification (STA) step is often used to improve the detection of low-abundance targets. Comparison of samples before and after STA showed that STA substantially increased detection frequencies on the Biomark HD platform, but had little effect on the SmartChip platform. Although most assays showed strong agreement between pre- and post-STA measurements and between platforms, discrepancies were observed for a subset of assays. Conventional qPCR and digital PCR results indicated that assay-specific amplification efficiency and sample quality contributed to the observed differences. Overall, these results demonstrate that both HT-qPCR platforms can provide reliable quantitative measurements when properly validated. However, consumable costs, workflow complexity, and maintenance requirements differed between platforms. Therefore, platform selection should consider sample throughput, assay requirements, available resources, and study objectives. IMPORTANCE: High-throughput qPCR is a powerful tool to detect and quantify various genes simultaneously. Numerous studies have used HT-qPCR for environmental and clinical microbiology applications; however, it is unclear whether different HT-qPCR platforms (e.g., Biomark and SmartChip) produce comparable results or not, as the HT-qPCR protocols are platform-specific. In particular, the use of pre-amplification reaction, also known as specific target amplification (STA), varies across studies. This study shows that both Biomark and SmartChip platforms provide similar quantitative data for most assays and that the STA reaction is useful to improve the detection of low-abundance targets without major biases. To accurately quantify on HT-qPCR platforms, assays should be carefully selected and validated. To guide current and future users, this study provides a general framework for assay selection in HT-qPCR.

Indexed as

BacteriaEnvironmental MicrobiologyHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionHumansSensitivity and Specificityantibiotic resistance genesBiomarkhigh-throughput quantitative PCRmicrobial source trackingpre-amplificationSmartChip

Identifiers

PMID42788721
PMCPMC13689234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.