IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0227434.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing bioinformatic pipelines for microbial 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing

Author

Listed:
  • Andrei Prodan
  • Valentina Tremaroli
  • Harald Brolin
  • Aeilko H Zwinderman
  • Max Nieuwdorp
  • Evgeni Levin

Abstract

Microbial amplicon sequencing studies are an important tool in biological and biomedical research. Widespread 16S rRNA gene microbial surveys have shed light on the structure of many ecosystems inhabited by bacteria, including the human body. However, specialized software and algorithms are needed to convert raw sequencing data into biologically meaningful information (i.e. tables of bacterial counts). While different bioinformatic pipelines are available in a rapidly changing and improving field, users are often unaware of limitations and biases associated with individual pipelines and there is a lack of agreement regarding best practices. Here, we compared six bioinformatic pipelines for the analysis of amplicon sequence data: three OTU-level flows (QIIME-uclust, MOTHUR, and USEARCH-UPARSE) and three ASV-level (DADA2, Qiime2-Deblur, and USEARCH-UNOISE3). We tested workflows with different quality control options, clustering algorithms, and cutoff parameters on a mock community as well as on a large (N = 2170) recently published fecal sample dataset from the multi-ethnic HELIUS study. We assessed the sensitivity, specificity, and degree of consensus of the different outputs. DADA2 offered the best sensitivity, at the expense of decreased specificity compared to USEARCH-UNOISE3 and Qiime2-Deblur. USEARCH-UNOISE3 showed the best balance between resolution and specificity. OTU-level USEARCH-UPARSE and MOTHUR performed well, but with lower specificity than ASV-level pipelines. QIIME-uclust produced large number of spurious OTUs as well as inflated alpha-diversity measures and should be avoided in future studies. This study provides guidance for researchers using amplicon sequencing to gain biological insights.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrei Prodan & Valentina Tremaroli & Harald Brolin & Aeilko H Zwinderman & Max Nieuwdorp & Evgeni Levin, 2020. "Comparing bioinformatic pipelines for microbial 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0227434
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227434
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227434&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0227434?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giulia Angelini & Lidia Castagneto-Gissey & Serenella Salinari & Alessandro Bertuzzi & Danila Anello & Meenakshi Pradhan & Marlen Zschätzsch & Paul Ritter & Carel W. Le Roux & Francesco Rubino & Nicol, 2022. "Upper gut heat shock proteins HSP70 and GRP78 promote insulin resistance, hyperglycemia, and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Jae-Hyun Lim & Il-Nam Kim, 2021. "Collection of a Bacterial Community Reconstructed from Marine Metagenomes Derived from Jinhae Bay, South Korea," Data, MDPI, vol. 6(5), pages 1-4, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0227434. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.