| Literature DB >> 35917163 |
Alexander Dietrich1, Monica Steffi Matchado1,2, Maximilian Zwiebel1, Benjamin Ölke1, Michael Lauber1, Ilias Lagkouvardos3, Jan Baumbach2,4, Dirk Haller3,5, Beate Brandl3, Thomas Skurk3, Hans Hauner3,6, Sandra Reitmeier3,5, Markus List1.
Abstract
16S rRNA gene profiling is currently the most widely used technique in microbiome research and allows the study of microbial diversity, taxonomic profiling, phylogenetics, functional and network analysis. While a plethora of tools have been developed for the analysis of 16S rRNA gene data, only a few platforms offer a user-friendly interface and none comprehensively covers the whole analysis pipeline from raw data processing down to complex analysis. We introduce Namco, an R shiny application that offers a streamlined interface and serves as a one-stop solution for microbiome analysis. We demonstrate Namco's capabilities by studying the association between a rich fibre diet and the gut microbiota composition. Namco helped to prove the hypothesis that butyrate-producing bacteria are prompted by fibre-enriched intervention. Namco provides a broad range of features from raw data processing and basic statistics down to machine learning and network analysis, thus covering complex data analysis tasks that are not comprehensively covered elsewhere. Namco is freely available at https://exbio.wzw.tum.de/namco/.Entities:
Keywords: bioinformatics pipeline; data visualization; microbial co-occurrence networks; microbial functional profiling; microbiome data analysis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35917163 PMCID: PMC9484756 DOI: 10.1099/mgen.0.000852
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microb Genom ISSN: 2057-5858
Fig. 1.Comparisons of Namco with other web-based tools for microbiome data analysis.
Fig. 2.Overall workflow of Namco. Namco provides a comprehensive end-to-end analysis of microbiome data including raw FASTQ processing and filtering, down to statistical, functional and network analysis. It also provides various tables and visualization options and allows users to navigate through different data analysis tasks.
Overview of the study group characteristics. Mean values and standard deviation for the participants are given, together with significant difference in traits between the sexes
|
Mean |
|
Differences between sexes | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Weight [kg] |
90.14 |
11.42 |
0.0080 (**) |
|
Height [m] |
1.73 |
0.08 |
1.35e-05 (***) |
|
BMI [kg m–2] |
30.12 |
2.41 |
0.8490 (ns) |
|
Fat-free mass [%] |
62.98 |
6.74 |
2.40e-08 (***) |
|
Fat mass [%] |
37.02 |
6.74 |
2.40e-08 (***) |
|
Skeletal muscle mass [kg] |
27.55 |
6.28 |
9.34e-07 (***) |
|
Visceral fat [kg] |
3.24 |
1.32 |
4.55e-05 (***) |
|
Waist circumference [cm] |
101.3 |
7.26 |
0.0058 (**) |
***Significance level at the < 0.001
**SIgnificance level at the < 0.01
*Significance level at the < 0.05
Nutritional values per serving for the intervention (enriched) and the placebo (standard) meatloaf and salami pizza meal as well as the difference between intervention and placebo meal
|
Portion meatloaf with bun 240 g |
Portion salami pizza 320 g | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Enriched |
Standard |
Enriched |
Standard | |
|
Energy [kcal] |
413 |
587 |
829 |
876 |
|
Fat [g] |
13 |
35 |
41 |
45 |
|
Carbohydrate [g] |
47 |
47 |
75 |
83 |
|
Total fibre [g] |
19 |
2.9 |
20 |
6 |
Fig. 3.(a) Alpha diversity measures associated with intervention (IM) and non-intervention meals (M). There was no significant difference identified between the groups. (b,c) NMDS visualizations of beta diversity analysis using the unweighted (b) or weighted (c) unifrac distance. (d) NMDS visualizations of beta diversity for intra-individual patients across two intervention meals and their respective control using weighted unifrac distances.
Fig. 4.(a, c) Relative abundances of phyla and genera between intervention and non-intervention groups. (b,d) Bar plots showing inter-individual variation in the gut microbiome between intervention and non-intervention meals.
Fig. 5.Boxplots representing significant differences between mean proportions of genera between four meal groups. Significance was tested using the non-parametric Wilcoxon rank test. IM1 and IM2 represent the first and second interventional meals, respectively. M1 and M2 represent the first and second non-intervention meals, respectively.
Fig. 6.Correlation between gut microbial composition and clinical variables at the phylum (a) and (b) genus levels.
Fig. 7.Bar plot showing the difference in the relative abundance of ABS transporters and glucokinase between the IM and M groups. P-values were calculated using the Wilcoxon rank test on abundance values.
Fig. 8.Bar plot showing pairwise group comparisons of significant pathways. Wilcoxon test was performed on relative abundance, and extended error bar plots were used for the comparison between IM and M groups. Only predicted functions and pathways with p < 0.05 are shown. Bar plots on the left side display the mean proportion of each KEGG Orthologues term with −log10 p-value while those on the right display the mean proportion of each KEGG pathway with −log10 p-values.
Fig. 9.Bacterial associations at the genus level for the intervention (IM) and non-intervention (M) groups using the SPRING method. Green edges represent positive associations and red edges represent negative associations. Node colours represent clusters determined by using greedy modularity optimization. Networks are shown with only the 50 nodes with the highest degree and 50 edges with highest weight.