ArticleScientific reports2026
Quantitative evaluation of microbiome sequencing resolution under varying experimental conditions using defined mock communities.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective evaluation of sequencing resolution is crucial for comparing technologies and ensuring reproducibility in microbiome analysis. Specifically, a systematic approach is necessary to quantitatively assess the effect of various platforms and experimental conditions on species-level resolution. Therefore, this study quantitatively evaluated multiple strategies, including 16S V3-V4 (16P), full-length 16S rRNA gene (16F), and whole metagenome shotgun sequencing (WMS), using a commercial DNA-based mock community (MC) and a domestically developed whole-cell MC (Korea MC [KMC]). The WMS strategy included 12 combinations of input DNA concentrations and sequencing output levels. A total of 64 WMS libraries were constructed for KMC samples, and 112 sequencing datasets were analysed. Taxonomic resolution was assessed using an adjusted F1-score integrating detection sensitivity and abundance-level reproducibility. Qualitatively examining the detected species against the expected species across platforms, WMS showed a true positive abundance ratio of over 90%, 16F was observed to have an average of 60%, and 16P was observed to have an average of less than 10%. The combination of 10 ng input and 10 gigabases output consistently yielded the highest species-level resolution. However, reduced performance was observed in some MCs under 1 ng or 100 ng DNA input conditions. Detection sensitivity varied by taxon and condition. Specifically, Streptococcus pneumoniae and Cryptococcus neoformans were detected only under high-input or -output conditions, whereas Escherichia coli exhibited optimal accuracy at intermediate inputs. Acinetobacter species demonstrated reduced resolution as input DNA increased. KMC samples showed species- and format-specific variability in DNA extraction efficiency. This study presents a quantitative evaluation of species-level resolution across sequencing conditions using defined mock communities. The results highlight how sequencing configuration and taxon-specific characteristics can influence detection performance and provide insights for interpreting microbiome sequencing results under different experimental conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.