Back

Evaluation of an optimized protocol and Illumina ARTIC V4 primer pool for sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 using COVIDSeq™ and DRAGEN™ COVID Lineage App workflow

Clark, C. R.; Hardison, M. T.; Houdeshell, H. N.; Vest, A. C.; Whitlock, D. A.; Skola, D. D.; Koble, J. S.; Oberholzer, M.; Schroth, G. P.

2022-01-10 genomics
10.1101/2022.01.07.475443 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Next-Generation Sequencing based genomic surveillance has been widely implemented for identification and tracking of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants to guide the Public Health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Amplicon-based assays, such as the Illumina(R) COVIDSeq Test (RUO) and COVIDSeq Assay (RUO), enable scalable sequencing of SARS-CoV-2, leveraging V3 and V4 primer designs from the ARTIC community and DRAGEN COVID Lineage App analysis available on Illumina BaseSpace. We report here a comparison of COVIDSeq performance for SARS-CoV-2 genome reporting using the ARTIC V3 based primer pool (including primers for human control genes) that is provided with the COVIDSeq kit versus the ARTIC V4 based Illumina COVIDSeq V4 primer pool, using an optimized protocol and DRAGEN COVID Lineage App analysis. The data indicates that both primer pools enable robust reporting of SARS-CoV-2 variants. The Illumina COVIDSeq V4 primer pool has superior performance for SARS-CoV-2 genome reporting, particularly in samples with low virus load, and is therefore the recommended primer pool for genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 for research use using COVIDSeq.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
● 130 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.1%
Similar papers in this journal
2
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 19%
9.5%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Journal of Clinical Virology
○ 63 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.7%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.7%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Virus Evolution
◐ 155 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
7.7%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
6
Clinical Chemistry
◐ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.4%
7
Microbiology Spectrum
● 469 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.0%
8
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
9
Viruses
○ 332 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.4%
10
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.2%
11
Microbial Genomics
● 225 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
12
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.7%
13
Wellcome Open Research
○ 67 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.5%
14
Journal of Medical Virology
○ 140 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
15
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.3%
16
mSphere
● 302 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.0%
17
PLOS Biology
● 486 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.0%
18
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
19
Genomics
○ 64 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
20
PLOS Pathogens
● 820 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
21
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%
22
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
23
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.