It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The microbiome is known to play a role in many human diseases, but identifying key microbes and their functions generally requires large studies due to the vast number of species and genes, and the high levels of intra-individual and inter-individual variation. 16S amplicon sequencing of the rRNA gene is commonly used for large studies due to its comparatively low sequencing cost, but it has poor taxonomic and functional resolution. Deep shotgun sequencing is a more accurate and comprehensive alternative for small studies, but can be cost-prohibitive for biomarker discovery in large populations. Shallow or moderate-depth shotgun metagenomics may serve as a viable alternative to 16S sequencing for large-scale and/or dense longitudinal studies, but only if resolution and reproducibility are comparable. Here we applied both 16S and shallow shotgun stool microbiome sequencing to a cohort of 5 subjects sampled twice daily and weekly, with technical replication at the DNA extraction and the library preparation/sequencing steps, for a total of 80 16S samples and 80 shallow shotgun sequencing samples. We found that shallow shotgun sequencing produced lower technical variation and higher taxonomic resolution than 16S sequencing, at a much lower cost than deep shotgun sequencing. These findings suggest that shallow shotgun sequencing provides a more specific and more reproducible alternative to 16S sequencing for large-scale microbiome studies where costs prohibit deep shotgun sequencing and where bacterial species are expected to have good coverage in whole-genome reference databases.
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 Diversigen, Inc., New Brighton, USA
2 Bristol Myers Squibb, San Francisco, USA (GRID:grid.450559.8) (ISNI:0000 0004 0457 284X)
3 Diversigen, Inc., New Brighton, USA (GRID:grid.450559.8)
4 Diversigen, Inc., New Brighton, USA (GRID:grid.450559.8); University of Minnesota, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Minneapolis, USA (GRID:grid.17635.36) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8657); University of Minnesota, Biotechnology Institute, College of Biological Sciences, Minneapolis, USA (GRID:grid.17635.36) (ISNI:0000000419368657)




