Factors influencing oral microbiome analysis: from saliva sampling methods to next-generation sequencing platforms

Abstract

The exploration of oral microbiome has been increasing due to its relatedness with various systemic diseases, but standardization of saliva sampling for microbiome analysis has not been established, contributing to the lack of data comparability. Here, we evaluated the factors that influence the microbiome data. Saliva samples were collected by the two collection methods (passive drooling and mouthwash) using three saliva-preservation methods (OMNIgene, DNA/RNA shield, and simple collection). A total of 18 samples were sequenced by both Illumina short-read and Nanopore long-read next-generation sequencing (NGS). The component of the oral microbiome in each sample was compared with alpha and beta diversity and the taxonomic abundances, to find out the effects of factors on oral microbiome data. The alpha diversity indices of the mouthwash sample were significantly higher than that of the drooling group with both short-read and long-read NGS, while no significant differences in microbial diversities were found between the three saliva-preservation methods. Our study shows mouthwash and simple collection are not inferior to other sample collection and saliva-preservation methods, respectively. This result is promising since the convenience and cost-effectiveness of mouthwash and simple collection can simplify the saliva sample preparation, which would greatly help clinical operators and lab workers.

Mucosal Microbiome in Patients with Early Bowel Polyps: Inferences from Short-Read and Long-Read 16S rRNA Sequencing

“…The issue of human DNA enrichment was overcome by targeting the V1-V9 16S rRNA region PCR product, which enabled species-level classification in 90% of reads. Moreover, the concordance between the short-read and long-read data sets in differentially abundant ASVs was limited, which is consistent with other comparisons of these two technologies [20,61,62]. This may be due to the differences in sequencing technologies as well as bioinformatics pipelines employed.…”

Oral Microbiome Dysbiosis and Surgical Outcomes

“…The development of next-generation sequencing has allowed the composition of the oral microbiome to be more thoroughly analyzed and compared between healthy and non-healthy indivudals. [22] As the composition of a healthy microbiome is decoded, its potential integration into personalized medicine to prevent and treat disease is promising. The importance of the oral microbiome in predicting the development of oral or systemic diseases has been recognized but research in oral microbiome dysbiosis and postoperative outcomes is lacking.…”

Microbes for lung cancer detection: feasibility and limitations

“…Studies have shown that the microbial diversity of microbes collected by mouthwash does not differ from those collected by drooling ( 79 ). Still, mouthwash is more favorable for patients with dry mouths and takes less time ( 80 ). Since ethanol-free mouthwash is more favorable for sample transport, subjects were asked to rinse their mouths with 0.9% saline for approximately 30 seconds ( 81 ).…”