| Literature DB >> 34869767 |
Xiaoling Yu1, Wenqian Jiang1, Xinhui Huang1, Jun Lin2, Hanhui Ye1, Baorong Liu1.
Abstract
Traditional pathogenic diagnosis presents defects such as a low positivity rate, inability to identify uncultured microorganisms, and time-consuming nature. Clinical metagenomics next-generation sequencing can be used to detect any pathogen, compensating for the shortcomings of traditional pathogenic diagnosis. We report third-generation long-read sequencing results and second-generation short-read sequencing results for ascitic fluid from a patient with liver ascites and compared the two types of sequencing results with the results of traditional clinical microbial culture. The distribution of pathogenic microbial species revealed by the two types of sequencing results was quite different, and the third-generation sequencing results were consistent with the results of traditional microbial culture, which can effectively guide subsequent treatment. Short reads, the lack of amplification, and enrichment to amplify signals from trace pathogens, and host background noise may be the reasons for the high error in the second-generation short-read sequencing results. Therefore, we propose that long-read-based rRNA analysis technology is superior to the short-read shotgun-based metagenomics method in the identification of pathogenic bacteria.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34869767 PMCID: PMC8642000 DOI: 10.1155/2021/6287280
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Statistical charts of the species annotation results of next-generation sequencing and PacBio sequencing at the species level. Each color represents a species, and the length of the color block represents the relative abundance ratio of the species; unclassified represents species that have not been taxonomically annotated. (a) Statistical chart of species annotation results of next-generation sequencing (Illumina) at the species level. (b) Statistical chart of species annotation results of PacBio sequencing at the species level.
Statistics of sample sequencing data processing results.
| Sample ID | Barcode-CCSa | Filtered-CCSb | Optimization-CCSc | Effective (%)d |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M173251 | 9385 | 8702 | 8562 | 91.23 |
aBarcode-CCS: the number of CCS sequences identified in the sample. bFiltered-CCS: the number of valid sequences after filtering according to length (1 kb-1.8 kb). cOptimization-CCS: the number of sequences used for subsequent analysis. dEffective (%): optimization-CCS sequences corresponding to the percentage of barcode CCS sequences.
Figure 2Effective tag length distribution diagram. The abscissa represents the length range, and the ordinate represents the number of reads.
Figure 3Phylogenetic diversity of the ascitic sample sequences calculated by MEGAN on the basis of PacBio sequencing. Each circle represents a taxon in the NCBI taxonomy and is labeled with its name and the number of reads that were either directly assigned to the taxon or indirectly assigned via one of its subtaxa. The size of the circles is logarithmically scaled to represent the number of reads assigned directly to the taxon [19].
Comparison of Illumina NovaSeq, PacBio, and Nanopore sequencing.
| Sequencing platform | Time of library preparation | Time of sequencing | Costs/GB (local price) | Data/per person (GB) | Library construction cost | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Illumina NovaSeq [ | 3-5 hours | Up to 44 hours | $ 7.14 | 5-8 G | $ 28.53 | 99.9% |
| PacBio [ | <3 hours | 0.5 to 30 hours | $ 9.98 | 29 M | $ 35.66 | >99.999% (CCS) |
| Nanopore MinION [ | 15 min + | Up to 48 hours | $ 42.43 | No relevant information was found | $ 141.37 | 93% |