Back

Library preparation strategy critically impacts RNA virus sensitivity in clinical metagenomics

Stepniak, D.; Constantinides, B.; Weaver, M.; Treagus, S.; Wilkinson, S. A.; Quarton, S.; Behruznia, M.; Cumley, N.; Tyson, J.; McNally, A.; Loman, N. J.; Pullan, S.; Quick, J.

2026-05-21 genetic and genomic medicine
10.64898/2026.05.18.26353500 medRxiv
Show abstract

Clinical metagenomics uses sequencing for culture-independent identification of pathogens directly from clinical specimens. While a number of protocols claim to be pathogen agnostic, sensitivity for RNA viruses is likely lower than for bacteria or fungi, as it requires additional processing steps including conversion to cDNA. Sequence-independent, single-primer amplification (SISPA) was first described in 1991, yet how it preferentially enriches viral molecules has never been described. Here we propose that single-primer amplification exploits the PCR suppression effect, which selectively amplifies longer viral molecules over shorter host-derived cDNA fragments on the basis of size. This model predicts that any upstream processing step that disrupts fragment length will prevent this enrichment occurring. To test this, we systematically compared two adapter introduction strategies - during cDNA synthesis and via tagmentation - followed by single primer amplification, using the ZeptoMetrix Respiratory Panel 2.1 containing 16 RNA and 3 DNA virus strains. SISPA-based approaches recovered all of the viral genomes in the control, whereas using tagmentation to amplify cDNA recovered none. We then spiked the controls into extracted clinical samples and found that SISPA-based methods performed best in all background settings, however in high-background settings no viral genomes were recovered by any approach. Finally, using a modified SMART-9N protocol, we demonstrated that single-primer PCR is critical to overall performance, indicating that direct tagmentation of cDNA and dual-primer PCR should be avoided in protocols for clinical metagenomics where high sensitivity for RNA viruses is critical. These findings demonstrate that library preparation strategy fundamentally determines RNA virus sensitivity and offer mechanistic insights for protocol optimisation with direct relevance to clinical metagenomics.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.5%
2
Nature Microbiology
155 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.5%
3
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 14%
6.1%
4
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
6.1%
5
ISME Communications
120 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.1%
6
Frontiers in Microbiology
427 papers in training set
Top 2%
5.3%
7
Genome Biology
637 papers in training set
Top 2%
5.3%
8
Microbiology Spectrum
469 papers in training set
Top 3%
4.7%
9
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 33%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
10
PLOS Biology
486 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.9%
11
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.1%
12
Genome Research
468 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
13
Microbial Genomics
225 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.1%
14
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
339 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
15
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
16
Wellcome Open Research
67 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.3%
17
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
242 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
18
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.8%
19
GigaScience
212 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
20
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.5%
21
mBio
833 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
22
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 36%
1.1%
23
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.1%
24
Journal of General Virology
53 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
25
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
26
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 66%
0.8%
27
Briefings in Bioinformatics
354 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
28
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
242 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
29
Water Research
79 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
30
Cell Reports Methods
165 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%