Project description:Urine culture and microscopy techniques are used to profile the bacterial species present in urinary tract infections. To gain insight into the urinary flora, we analyzed clinical laboratory features and the microbial metagenome of 121 clean-catch urine samples. 16S rDNA gene signatures were successfully obtained for 116 participants, while metagenome sequencing data was successfully generated for samples from 49 participants. Although 16S rDNA sequencing was more sensitive, metagenome sequencing allowed for a more comprehensive and unbiased representation of the microbial flora, including eukarya and viral pathogens, and of bacterial virulence factors. Urine samples positive by metagenome sequencing contained a plethora of bacterial (median 41 genera/sample), eukarya (median 2 species/sample) and viral sequences (median 3 viruses/sample). Genomic analyses suggested cases of infection with potential pathogens that are often missed during routine urine culture due to species specific growth requirements. While conventional microbiological methods are inadequate to identify a large diversity of microbial species that are present in urine, genomic approaches appear to more comprehensively and quantitatively describe the urinary microbiome.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite recent decreases in the cost of sequencing, shotgun metagenome sequencing remains more expensive compared with 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing. Methods have been developed to predict the functional profiles of microbial communities based on their taxonomic composition. In this study, we evaluated the performance of three commonly used metagenome prediction tools (PICRUSt, PICRUSt2, and Tax4Fun) by comparing the significance of the differential abundance of predicted functional gene profiles to those from shotgun metagenome sequencing across different environments. RESULTS:We selected 7 datasets of human, non-human animal, and environmental (soil) samples that have publicly available 16S rRNA and shotgun metagenome sequences. As we would expect based on previous literature, strong Spearman correlations were observed between predicted gene compositions and gene relative abundance measured with shotgun metagenome sequencing. However, these strong correlations were preserved even when the abundance of genes were permuted across samples. This suggests that simple correlation coefficient is a highly unreliable measure for the performance of metagenome prediction tools. As an alternative, we compared the performance of genes predicted with PICRUSt, PICRUSt2, and Tax4Fun to sequenced metagenome genes in inference models associated with metadata within each dataset. With this approach, we found reasonable performance for human datasets, with the metagenome prediction tools performing better for inference on genes related to "housekeeping" functions. However, their performance degraded sharply outside of human datasets when used for inference. CONCLUSION:We conclude that the utility of PICRUSt, PICRUSt2, and Tax4Fun for inference with the default database is likely limited outside of human samples and that development of tools for gene prediction specific to different non-human and environmental samples is warranted. Video abstract.
Project description:The incidence and severity of respiratory diseases in commercial broiler chicken flocks have increased recently in India because of intensification of the broiler industry. Viral population are predominant in respiratory tract infections and they pose continuous economic burden to poultry industry by causing severe economic losses through decreased productivity , . To understand viral metagenome of poultry associated with respiratory infections, we performed DNA virome sequencing and data analysis of broilers from 8 districts of Gujarat State in India. We report high quality sequencing reads and highly abundant DNA viral population present in the infected broiler birds. The raw sequencing data used to perform metagenomic analysis is available in the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under the BioProject No. PRJNA322592 and Accession No. MAUZ00000000, MAVA00000000, MAVB00000000, MAVC00000000, MAVD00000000, MAVE00000000, MAVF00000000, MAVG00000000 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/?term=PRJNA322592).