A comprehensive benchmarking study of protocols and sequencing platforms for 16S rRNA community profiling

Abstract

BackgroundIn the last 5 years, the rapid pace of innovations and improvements in sequencing technologies has completely changed the landscape of metagenomic and metagenetic experiments. Therefore, it is critical to benchmark the various methodologies for interrogating the composition of microbial communities, so that we can assess their strengths and limitations. The most common phylogenetic marker for microbial community diversity studies is the 16S ribosomal RNA gene and in the last 10 years the field has moved from sequencing a small number of amplicons and samples to more complex studies where thousands of samples and multiple different gene regions are interrogated.ResultsWe assembled 2 synthetic communities with an even (EM) and uneven (UM) distribution of archaeal and bacterial strains and species, as metagenomic control material, to assess performance of different experimental strategies. The 2 synthetic communities were used in this study, to highlight the limitations and the advantages of the leading sequencing platforms: MiSeq (Illumina), The Pacific Biosciences RSII, 454 GS-FLX/+ (Roche), and IonTorrent (Life Technologies). We describe an extensive survey based on synthetic communities using 3 experimental designs (fusion primers, universal tailed tag, ligated adaptors) across the 9 hypervariable 16S rDNA regions. We demonstrate that library preparation methodology can affect data interpretation due to different error and chimera rates generated during the procedure. The observed community composition was always biased, to a degree that depended on the platform, sequenced region and primer choice. However, crucially, our analysis suggests that 16S rRNA sequencing is still quantitative, in that relative changes in abundance of taxa between samples can be recovered, despite these biases.ConclusionWe have assessed a range of experimental conditions across several next generation sequencing platforms using the most up-to-date configurations. We propose that the choice of sequencing platform and experimental design needs to be taken into consideration in the early stage of a project by running a small trial consisting of several hypervariable regions to quantify the discriminatory power of each region. We also suggest that the use of a synthetic community as a positive control would be beneficial to identify the potential biases and procedural drawbacks that may lead to data misinterpretation. The results of this study will serve as a guideline for making decisions on which experimental condition and sequencing platform to consider to achieve the best microbial profiling.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12864-015-2194-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Different next generation sequencing platforms produce different microbial profiles and diversity in cystic fibrosis sputum

“…Since Roche will be discontinuing the 454 platform [8], two commercially available state-of-the-art next-generation sequencing (NGS) platforms have been proposed to characterize the CF lung microbiome: MiSeq (Illumina, San Diego CA) and PacBio RSII (Pacific Biosciences, Menlo Park CA). Each has its advantages and limitations.…”

Heterogeneity Spacers in 16S rDNA Primers Improve Analysis of Mouse Gut Microbiomes via Greater Nucleotide Diversity

“…This fact is particularly true for 16S rDNA sequencing with Illumina MiSeq, which has helped facilitate research on the microbiome due to its capacity for high-throughput sequencing and long reads, with low analytic cost [4]. The 16S rDNA gene consists of nine hypervariable regions flanked by highly conserved regions, making it an attractive target for amplicon sequencing of microbial communities [5]. Moreover, the sequences of the hypervariable regions allow for identification of unique bacteria.…”

Adding Complexity to Complexity: Gene Family Evolution in Polyploids

“…While 454 pyrosequencing has largely been replaced by methods demonstrated to show higher accuracy such as Illumina (Schirmer et al, 2015D'Amore et al, 2016), we use results from this study as a platform to highlight considerations for working with gene families that should apply across methods. We thus haven't focused on attempting to resolve 454 specific problems but instead on general issues with clustering and assigning sequence variants to loci and designating allelic specificities for interpretation of gene family evolution.…”