We present QIIME 2, an open-source microbiome data science platform accessible to users spanning the microbiome research ecosystem, from scientists and engineers to clinicians and policy makers. QIIME 2 provides new features that will drive the next generation of microbiome research. These include interactive spatial and temporal analysis and visualization tools, support for metabolomics and shotgun metagenomics analysis, and automated data provenance tracking to ensure reproducible, transparent microbiome data science.
One major limitation of microbial community marker gene sequencing is that it does not provide direct information on the functional composition of sampled communities. Here, we present PICRUSt2 (https://github.com/picrust/picrust2), which expands the capabilities of the original PICRUSt method1 to predict the functional potential of a community based on marker gene sequencing profiles. This updated method and implementation includes several improvements over the previous algorithm: an expanded database of gene families and reference genomes, a new approach now compatible with any OTU-picking or denoising algorithm, and novel phenotype predictions. Upon evaluation, PICRUSt2 was more accurate than PICRUSt1 and other current approaches overall. PICRUSt2 is also now more flexible and allows the addition of custom reference databases. We highlight these improvements and also important caveats regarding the use of predicted metagenomes, which are related to the inherent challenges of analyzing metagenome data in general.
Identifying differentially abundant microbes is a common goal of microbiome studies. Multiple methods are used interchangeably for this purpose in the literature. Yet, there are few large-scale studies systematically exploring the appropriateness of using these tools interchangeably, and the scale and significance of the differences between them. Here, we compare the performance of 14 differential abundance testing methods on 38 16S rRNA gene datasets with two sample groups. We test for differences in amplicon sequence variants and operational taxonomic units (ASVs) between these groups. Our findings confirm that these tools identified drastically different numbers and sets of significant ASVs, and that results depend on data pre-processing. For many tools the number of features identified correlate with aspects of the data, such as sample size, sequencing depth, and effect size of community differences. ALDEx2 and ANCOM-II produce the most consistent results across studies and agree best with the intersect of results from different approaches. Nevertheless, we recommend that researchers should use a consensus approach based on multiple differential abundance methods to help ensure robust biological interpretations.
We present QIIME 2, an opensource microbiome data science platform accessible to users spanning the microbiome research ecosystem, from scientists and engineers to clinicians and policy makers. QIIME 2 provides new features that will drive the next generation of microbiome research. These include interactive spatial and temporal analysis and visualization tools, support for metabolomics and shotgun metagenomics analysis, and automated data provenance tracking to ensure reproducible, transparent microbiome data science.PeerJ Preprints | https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.27295v2 | CC BY 4.0 Open Access | rec:
We present QIIME 2, an open-source microbiome data science platform accessible to users spanning the microbiome research ecosystem, from scientists and engineers to clinicians and policy makers. QIIME 2 provides new features that will drive the next generation of microbiome research. These include interactive spatial and temporal analysis and visualization tools, support for metabolomics and shotgun metagenomics analysis, and automated data provenance tracking to ensure reproducible, transparent microbiome data science.
Background Plastics now pollute marine environments across the globe. On entering these environments, plastics are rapidly colonised by a diverse community of microorganisms termed the plastisphere. Members of the plastisphere have a myriad of diverse functions typically found in any biofilm but, additionally, a number of marine plastisphere studies have claimed the presence of plastic-biodegrading organisms, although with little mechanistic verification. Here, we obtained a microbial community from marine plastic debris and analysed the community succession across 6 weeks of incubation with different polyethylene terephthalate (PET) products as the sole carbon source, and further characterised the mechanisms involved in PET degradation by two bacterial isolates from the plastisphere. Results We found that all communities differed significantly from the inoculum and were dominated by Gammaproteobacteria, i.e. Alteromonadaceae and Thalassospiraceae at early time points, Alcanivoraceae at later time points and Vibrionaceae throughout. The large number of encoded enzymes involved in PET degradation found in predicted metagenomes and the observation of polymer oxidation by FTIR analyses both suggested PET degradation was occurring. However, we were unable to detect intermediates of PET hydrolysis with metabolomic analyses, which may be attributed to their rapid depletion by the complex community. To further confirm the PET biodegrading potential within the plastisphere of marine plastic debris, we used a combined proteogenomic and metabolomic approach to characterise amorphous PET degradation by two novel marine isolates, Thioclava sp. BHET1 and Bacillus sp. BHET2. The identification of PET hydrolytic intermediates by metabolomics confirmed that both isolates were able to degrade PET. High-throughput proteomics revealed that whilst Thioclava sp. BHET1 used the degradation pathway identified in terrestrial environment counterparts, these were absent in Bacillus sp. BHET2, indicating that either the enzymes used by this bacterium share little homology with those characterised previously, or that this bacterium uses a novel pathway for PET degradation. Conclusions Overall, the results of our multi-OMIC characterisation of PET degradation provide a significant step forwards in our understanding of marine plastic degradation by bacterial isolates and communities and evidences the biodegrading potential extant in the plastisphere of marine plastic debris.
In metagenomic analyses of microbiomes, one of the first steps is usually the taxonomic classification of reads by comparison to a database of previously taxonomically classified genomes. While different studies comparing metagenomic taxonomic classification methods have determined that different tools are ‘best’, there are two tools that have been used the most to-date: Kraken (k-mer-based classification against a user-constructed database) and MetaPhlAn (classification by alignment to clade-specific marker genes), the latest versions of which are Kraken2 and MetaPhlAn 3, respectively. We found large discrepancies in both the proportion of reads that were classified as well as the number of species that were identified when we used both Kraken2 and MetaPhlAn 3 to classify reads within metagenomes from human-associated or environmental datasets. We then investigated which of these tools would give classifications closest to the real composition of metagenomic samples using a range of simulated and mock samples and examined the combined impact of tool–parameter–database choice on the taxonomic classifications given. This revealed that there may not be a one-size-fits-all ‘best’ choice. While Kraken2 can achieve better overall performance, with higher precision, recall and F1 scores, as well as alpha- and beta-diversity measures closer to the known composition than MetaPhlAn 3, the computational resources required for this may be prohibitive for many researchers, and the default database and parameters should not be used. We therefore conclude that the best tool–parameter–database choice for a particular application depends on the scientific question of interest, which performance metric is most important for this question and the limit of available computational resources.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.