| Literature DB >> 30834996 |
Stefan A Boers1, Ruud Jansen2, John P Hays3.
Abstract
Recent advancements in next-generation sequencing (NGS) have provided the foundation for modern studies into the composition of microbial communities. The use of these NGS methods allows for the detection and identification of ('difficult-to-culture') microorganisms using a culture-independent strategy. In the field of routine clinical diagnostics however, the application of NGS is currently limited to microbial strain typing for epidemiological purposes only, even though the implementation of NGS for microbial community analysis may yield clinically important information. This lack of NGS implementation is due to many different factors, including issues relating to NGS method standardization and result reproducibility. In this review article, the authors provide a general introduction to the most widely used NGS methods currently available (i.e., targeted amplicon sequencing and shotgun metagenomics) and the strengths and weaknesses of each method is discussed. The focus of the publication then shifts toward 16S rRNA gene NGS methods, which are currently the most cost-effective and widely used NGS methods for research purposes, and are therefore more likely to be successfully implemented into routine clinical diagnostics in the short term. In this respect, the experimental pitfalls and biases created at each step of the 16S rRNA gene NGS workflow are explained, as well as their potential solutions. Finally, a novel diagnostic microbiota profiling platform ('MYcrobiota') is introduced, which was developed by the authors by taking into consideration the pitfalls, biases, and solutions explained in this article. The development of the MYcrobiota, and future NGS methodologies, will help pave the way toward the successful implementation of NGS methodologies into routine clinical diagnostics.Entities:
Keywords: (Shotgun) metagenomics; 16S rRNA gene; Microbiota analysis; Next-generation sequencing; Pitfalls and biases; Routine clinical microbiological diagnostics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30834996 PMCID: PMC6520317 DOI: 10.1007/s10096-019-03520-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis ISSN: 0934-9723 Impact factor: 3.267
Fig. 1General overview of 16S rRNA gene NGS and shotgun metagenomics methods. Both methods start with the extraction of nucleic acids from a microbial sample. Next, the extracted DNA is either subjected to 16S rRNA gene PCR amplification (16S rRNA gene NGS) or sheared into small DNA fragments (shotgun metagenomics). The resultant 16S rRNA gene amplicons, or sheared DNA fragments, are sequenced using NGS techniques. Finally, all sequence data are processed using an extensive array of bioinformatics algorithms that allows the researcher to explore the taxonomic composition and/or the functional capacity of the sample tested. OTU operational taxonomic units—a group of very similar sequences.
Experimental pitfalls and biases generated using 16S rRNA gene NGS methods and their potential solutions. The potential pitfalls and biases are listed for each step of the 16S rRNA gene NGS process, from sample collection to bioinformatics analysis
| Experimental pitfalls and biases | General remarks and potential solutions |
|---|---|
| Step 1: sample collection | |
| Transport and storage conditions can impact DNA yield and DNA quality prior to 16S rRNA gene NGS experiments. | Optimal preservation of microbial samples involves immediate freezing at − 20 °C or lower, followed by long-term storage at − 80 °C. Repeated freezing and thawing should be avoided. |
| Step 2: DNA extraction | |
| Different lysis methods can impact the final 16S rRNA gene NGS results. | The most efficient lysis method depends on the sample type and the target microbial species under investigation, which should ideally be determined by the end user. For reproducibility, the same method should be used in all subsequent experiments for this sample type. |
| Step 3: PCR amplification | |
| No 16S rRNA gene PCR primer pair is truly ‘universal’ and different primer pairs may hybridize to different proportions of ‘conserved’ sequences. | The most optimal PCR primer pair should be selected based on its primer binding capacity to the (expected or most clinically relevant) microbial species present within the investigated sample. |
| Step 4: next-generation sequencing | |
| Current most widely used NGS-platforms produce sequence reads that span only a few hundred nucleotides, which complicates the reliable assignment of short 16S rRNA gene sequences to in silico stored reference 16S rRNA gene sequences. | Targeting the 16S rRNA gene V4 region allows for a large overlap of DNA sequences that are obtained from both ends of the PCR amplicon using Illumina’s MiniSeq/MiSeq NGS-platforms. This results in accurate NGS results with negligible error rates, though the accompanying cost is a reduction of discriminatory power due to the short amplicon size. |
| Step 5: Bioinformatics analysis | |
| The evaluation of NGS data by different bioinformatics algorithms (and their settings) may lead to different 16S rRNA gene NGS results. | Several standardized bioinformatics pipelines are available that allow for automated sequence interpretation without the requirement for advanced bioinformatics skills. |
| Miscellaneous | |
| 16S rRNA gene NGS results are generally presented as proportional abundances of OTUs, which complicates cross-study comparability. | The use of protocols that determine the absolute quantity of OTUs improves the standardization of 16S rRNA gene NGS results in different studies. |
OTU operational taxonomic units—a group of very similar sequences