Is a multi-centre study evaluating the use of nanopore-16S for clinical microbial detection using shared mock samples (looking for consitency, LODs etc..?)
This study does nanopore on 16S. Compares two bioinformatic pipelines and uses Emu
Todd: Emu holding its own against a commercial tool, fewer species classified (likely DB issue) but better precision wrt discriminating species
Evaluation of two bioinformatic pipelines: 1928-16S and GMS-16S<br />
The performance of two separate bioinformatic pipelines were compared: the commercial 16S pipeline developed by 1928 Diagnostics (1928-16S) and the gms_16S bioinformatics analysis pipeline that uses the EMU classification tool (GMS-16S). Overall, 1928-16S identified a higher number of species in comparison to GMS-16S (Supplementary FigS2, Supplementary file 2 and 3). However, significant differences were observed at species level, particularly for Streptococcus and Staphylococcus. GMS-16S demonstrated high accuracy of species level classification, effectively discriminating S. intermedius from S. anginosus in sample G4, as well as separating S. aureus from Staphylococcus argenteus in sample Q3 (Fig. 3a). GMS-16S also more accurately classified members of the Enterobacteriaceae family (Q7, Q5), and was able to identify Serratia marcescens at species level with greater precision in sample Q1 compared to 1928-16S. Conversely, 1928-16S classified a larger proportion of reads as C. acnes in sample G6 (laboratory k), whereas GMS-16S distributed the reads between C. acnes and the closely related C. namnetense.
<annotations in Public group>