It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Metagenome studies are becoming increasingly widespread, yielding important insights into microbial communities covering diverse environments from terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems to human skin and gut. With the advent of high-throughput sequencing platforms, the use of large scale shotgun sequencing approaches is now commonplace. However, a thorough independent benchmark comparing state-of-the-art metagenome analysis tools is lacking. Here, we present a benchmark where the most widely used tools are tested on complex, realistic data sets. Our results clearly show that the most widely used tools are not necessarily the most accurate, that the most accurate tool is not necessarily the most time consuming and that there is a high degree of variability between available tools. These findings are important as the conclusions of any metagenomics study are affected by errors in the predicted community composition and functional capacity. Data sets and results are freely available from
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Biomolecular Interaction Centre, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand (GRID:grid.21006.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2179 1970); School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand (GRID:grid.21006.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2179 1970); Section for Computational and RNA Biology, University of Copenhagen, Department of Biology, Copenhagen, Denmark (GRID:grid.5254.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 0674 042X); Carlsberg Laboratory, Gamle Carlsberg Vej 4-10, Copenhagen V, Denmark (GRID:grid.418674.8) (ISNI:0000 0004 0533 4528)
2 Biomolecular Interaction Centre, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand (GRID:grid.21006.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2179 1970); School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand (GRID:grid.21006.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2179 1970)




