Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Effect of Amplicon Sequencing Depth in Environmental Microbiome Research

  • Published:
Current Microbiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Amplicon sequencing approach is commonly employed in microbiome studies and sequencing depth is considered as a major factor influencing the outcome of data analyses. As of now, the effect of amplicon sequencing depth in environmental microbiome analyses is not explicitly illustrated. In this study, microbiome data of nine aquatic samples from Sundarbans mangrove region, obtained from SRA, were analyzed to explain the influence of sequencing depth variation in environmental microbiome data analyses. Briefly, four groups based on number of reads (NOR) were created comprising of, total NOR, 75 k, 50 k and 25 k, followed by data analyses. The results showed that the observed ASVs among four groups were significantly different (P value 1.094e−06). The Bray–Curtis dissimilarity analysis showed differences in microbiome composition and also, each group exhibited slightly different core-microbiome structure. Importantly, the variation in sequencing depth was found to affect the predictions of environmental drivers associated with microbiome composition. Thus, this study emphasizes that the microbiome data are compositional and the NOR in the data could affect the microbial composition. In summary, this study demonstrates the consequences of sequencing depth variation on microbiome data analyses and suggests the researchers to take proper cautions to avoid misleading results due to sequencing depth variation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McKenney EA, Koelle K, Dunn RR, Yoder AD (2018) The ecosystem services of animal microbiomes. Mol Ecol 27:2164–2172. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14532

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Delgado-Baquerizo M, Oliverio AM, Brewer TE, Benavent-Gonzalez A, Eldridge DJ, Bardgett RD, Maestre FT, Singh BK, Fierer N (2018) A global atlas of the dominant bacteria found in soil. Science 359:320–325. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9516

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hannula SE, Ma HK, Perez-Jaramillo JE, Pineda A, Bezemer TM (2020) Structure and ecological function of the soil microbiome affecting plant-soil feedbacks in the presence of a soil-borne pathogen. Environ Microbiol 22:660–676. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.14882

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pollock J, Glendinning L, Wisedchanwet T, Watson M (2018) The madness of microbiome: attempting to find consensus “best practice” for 16s microbiome studies. Appl Environ Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02627-17

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Gloor GB, Macklaim JM, Pawlowsky-Glahn V, Egozcue JJ (2017) Microbiome datasets are compositional: and this is not optional. Front Microbiol 8:2224. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.02224

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Pereira-Marques J, Hout A, Ferreira RM, Weber M, Pinto-Ribeiro I, van Doorn LJ, Knetsch CW, Figueiredo C (2019) Impact of host DNA and sequencing depth on the taxonomic resolution of whole metagenome sequencing for microbiome analysis. Front Microbiol 10:1277. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.01277

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Pollock J, Glendinning L, Wisedchanwet T, Watson M, Liu S-J (2018) The madness of microbiome: attempting to find consensus “best practice” for 16s microbiome studies. Appl Environ Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.02627-17

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Rajan SK, Lindqvist M, Brummer RJ, Schoultz I, Repsilber D (2019) Phylogenetic microbiota profiling in fecal samples depends on combination of sequencing depth and choice of NGS analysis method. PLoS ONE 14:e0222171. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Zaheer R, Noyes N, Ortega Polo R, Cook SR, Marinier E, Van Domselaar G, Belk KE, Morley PS, McAllister TA (2018) Impact of sequencing depth on the characterization of the microbiome and resistome. Sci Rep 8:5890. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-24280-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Gweon HS, Shaw LP, Swann J, De Maio N, AbuOun M, Niehus R, Hubbard ATM, Bowes MJ, Bailey MJ, Peto TEA, Hoosdally SJ, Walker AS, Sebra RP, Crook DW, Anjum MF, Read DS, Stoesser N, Consortium. obotR (2019) The impact of sequencing depth on the inferred taxonomic composition and AMR gene content of metagenomic samples. Environ Microbiome 14:7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Dhal PK, Kopprio GA, Gardes A (2020) Insights on aquatic microbiome of the Indian Sundarbans mangrove areas. PLoS ONE 15:e0221543. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221543

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJ, Holmes SP (2016) DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods 13:581–583. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3869

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. McMurdie PJ, Holmes S (2013) phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE 8:e61217. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Murali A, Bhargava A, Wright ES (2018) IDTAXA: a novel approach for accurate taxonomic classification of microbiome sequences. Microbiome 6:140. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-018-0521-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Wickham H (2016) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Oksanen J, Balanchet FG, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, Minchin PR, O'Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Szoecs E, Wagner H (2019) vegan: Community Ecology Pacakage. R Pacakage version 2.5–6. https://cran.r-project.org/package=vegan

  17. Caruso V, Song X, Asquith M, Karstens L (2019) Performance of microbiome sequence inference methods in environments with varying biomass. mSystems. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSystems.00163-18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Mas-Lloret J, Obón-Santacana M, Ibáñez-Sanz G, Guinó E, Pato ML, Rodriguez-Moranta F, Mata A, García-Rodríguez A, Moreno V, Pimenoff VN (2020) Gut microbiome diversity detected by high-coverage 16S and shotgun sequencing of paired stool and colon sample. Sci Data. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0427-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Dr. Bhawna Dubey, Scientist, GeneTech Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad for reviewing the manuscript. The efforts of Dr. Dhal, Jadavpur University for making the data publicly available on SRA is highly appreciated. CSIR-NEERI is acknowledged for providing the necessary support to carry out the analyses.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meganathan P. Ramakodi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramakodi, M.P. Effect of Amplicon Sequencing Depth in Environmental Microbiome Research. Curr Microbiol 78, 1026–1033 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-021-02345-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-021-02345-8

Navigation