The Influences of Bioinformatics Tools and Reference Databases in Analyzing the Human Oral Microbial Community

Abstract

There is currently no criterion to select appropriate bioinformatics tools and reference databases for analysis of 16S rRNA amplicon data in the human oral microbiome. Our study aims to determine the influence of multiple tools and reference databases on α-diversity measurements and β-diversity comparisons analyzing the human oral microbiome. We compared the results of taxonomical classification by Greengenes, the Human Oral Microbiome Database (HOMD), National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) 16S, SILVA, and the Ribosomal Database Project (RDP) using Quantitative Insights Into Microbial Ecology (QIIME) and the Divisive Amplicon Denoising Algorithm (DADA2). There were 15 phyla present in all of the analyses, four phyla exclusive to certain databases, and different numbers of genera were identified in each database. Common genera found in the oral microbiome, such as Veillonella, Rothia, and Prevotella, are annotated by all databases; however, less common genera, such as Bulleidia and Paludibacter, are only annotated by large databases, such as Greengenes. Our results indicate that using different reference databases in 16S rRNA amplicon data analysis could lead to different taxonomic compositions, especially at genus level. There are a variety of databases available, but there are no defined criteria for data curation and validation of annotations, which can affect the accuracy and reproducibility of results, making it difficult to compare data across studies.

New insights in bacterial and eukaryotic diversity of microbial mats inhabiting exploited and abandoned salterns at the Ré Island (France)

“…Raw sequences were demultiplexed and then filtered, denoised, merged and grouped in non-chimeric sequences with DADA 2 (Callahan et al 2016) followed by a singleton filtering. The taxonomic affiliation was performed against the Silva database v132 (Quast et al 2012;Yilmaz et al 2013) with 97% of similarities in order to compare the biodiversity obtained in previous studies, as it is used in most studies exploring biodiversity in microbial mats (Cardoso et al 2019;Sierra et al 2020;Vogt et al 2018). Additionally, Silva database allows to analyse the three domains of life (Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukarya) while the other databases (e.g.…”

The clinical utility of two high-throughput 16S rRNA gene sequencing workflows for taxonomic assignment of unidentifiable bacterial pathogens in MALDI-TOF MS

“…With the Illumina platform, the concordance of the classified species between MSR and Sanger 16S was exceptionally low; only 33.14% of samples matched the reference at top classified species compared with 65.70% when using NGS_BLAST+. As described in previous studies, the use of different bioinformatic tools and 16S rRNA sequence databases could result in different taxonomic assignments, especially at lower taxonomic levels (24,25). The latest version of the Greengenes database for MSR was updated in 2013 and does not contain certain new bacterial taxa, which accounts for the poor agreement of this workflow compared with others (25).…”

Species-Level Resolution of Female Bladder Microbiota from 16S rRNA Amplicon Sequencing

“…While database selection is recognized as an important decision in taxonomy assignment for amplicon sequencing studies, few studies have compared the effect of different databases on taxonomy assignment ( 47 , 49 , 55 , 56 ), and none have focused on bladder bacterial species. Park and Won recently compared database performance on mock microbial communities and similarly found that the Silva database outperformed the Greengenes database ( 55 ).…”