AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Komatsoulis, G. A.
Right arrow Articles by Waterman, M. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Komatsoulis, G. A.
Right arrow Articles by Waterman, M. S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Komatsoulis, G. A.
Right arrow Articles by Waterman, M. S.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 06 1997, 2338-2346, Vol 63, No. 6
Copyright © 1997, American Society for Microbiology

A new computational method for detection of chimeric 16S rRNA artifacts generated by PCR amplification from mixed bacterial populations

GA Komatsoulis and MS Waterman
Department of Mathematics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles 90089-1113, USA. gkoma@hto.usc.edu

A new computational method (chimeric alignment) has been developed to detect chimeric 16S rRNA artifacts generated during PCR amplification from mixed bacterial populations. In contrast to other nearest-neighbor methods (e.g., CHECK_CHIMERA) that define sequence similarity by k- tuple matching, the chimeric alignment method uses the score from dynamic programming alignments. Further, the chimeric alignments are displayed to the user to assist in sequence classification. The distribution of improvement scores for 500 authentic, nonchimeric sequences and 300 artificial chimeras (constructed from authentic sequences) was used to study the sensitivity and accuracy of both chimeric alignment and CHECK_CHIMERA. At a constant rate of authentic sequence misclassification (5%), chimeric alignment incorrectly classified 13% of the artificial chimeras versus 14% for CHECK_CHIMERA. Interestingly, only 1% of nonchimeras and 10% of chimeras were misclassified by both programs, suggesting that optimum performance is obtained by using the two methods to assign sequences to three classes: high-probability nonchimeras, high-probability chimeras, and sequences that need further study by other means. This study suggests that k- tuple-based matching methods are more sensitive than alignment-based methods when there is significant parental sequence similarity, while the opposite becomes true as the sequences become more distantly related. The software and a World Wide Web-based server are available at http://www-hto.usc.edu/software/mglobal CHI.


This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 1997 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.