Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Methods

Effects of Experimental Choices and Analysis Noise on Surveys of the “Rare Biosphere”

Timothy J. Hamp, W. Joe Jones, Anthony A. Fodor
Timothy J. Hamp
1Department of Bioinformatics and Genomics, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, North Carolina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W. Joe Jones
2Environmental Genomics Core Facility, University of South Carolina at Columbia, Columbia, South Carolina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anthony A. Fodor
1Department of Bioinformatics and Genomics, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, North Carolina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: anthony.fodor@gmail.com
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01931-08
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • FIG. 1.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 1.

    Sequence conservation as a function of alignment position for the 489,840 sequences in version 9.59 of the RDP. The x axis shows the position in the alignment as numbered by the E. coli 16S rRNA gene. The y axis shows the Shannon sequence entropy (see Materials and Methods), a widely used measure of conservation in multiple sequence alignments (23). Highly conserved positions within the alignment have a sequence entropy close to zero and hence are shown toward the top of the y axis. Positions of the hypervariable regions V1-V3 and V6-V7 are derived from Chakravorty et al. (3).

  • FIG. 2.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 2.

    Number of sequences assigned at the family classification level by the RDP classification algorithm to different sequences for the V1-V2, V6, and V6-V7 primers plotted against the number of 16S sequences assigned to the whole-genome shotgun sequence set. One has been added to each count to allow the data to be shown on a log-log plot.

  • FIG. 3.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 3.

    Across taxonomic levels, the results of a linear regression on log-transformed data between sequences generated by PCR targeting the 16S rRNA gene and 16S sequences culled from our whole-genome shotgun sequence set. Assignments are by the RDP classification algorithm as in Fig. 2. For each sequence set, two separate regressions were constructed, one for the rare biosphere (circles) with taxa seen 10 or fewer times in that sequence set's PCRs and one for a common biosphere (squares) with taxa seen 11 or more times in the PCR reactions (Fig. 1, gray lines). The top panels show the −log10 of the P value of the null hypothesis that the slope of the regression equals zero. The middle panels show Pearson's R values while the bottom panel shows the number of taxa for which classifications are made. Note that a significant P value (top panel) can be produced by either a negative or positive correlation.

  • FIG. 4.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 4.

    Comparison of classifications at the family level made by JGast and the RDP classification algorithm.

  • FIG. 5.
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG. 5.

    Regressions across classification levels on log-transformed data showing the comparison between the RDP classification algorithm and JGast. Two regressions were constructed for each comparison: one for a common biosphere in which a taxon was observed 11 or more times under either JGast or RDP (squares) and one for a rare taxon in which fewer than 11 taxa were observed under both classification schemes.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
  • TABLE 1.

    Primers used in initial 16S rRNA gene experimentsa

    PrimerSequenceSource or reference
    27FgcctccctcgcgccatcagMGAGTTTGATCCTGGCTCAG 15
    337RgccttgccagcccgctcagGCTGCCTCCCGTAGGAGTFig. 1
    967FgcctccctcgcgccatcagCAACGCGAAGAACCTTACC 25
    1046RgccttgccagcccgctcagCGACAGCCATGCANCACCT
    967FgcctccctcgcgccatcagCAACGCGAAGAACCTTACC 25
    1177RgccttgccagcccgctcagCGTCATCCCCACCTTCCTFig. 1
    • ↵ a The lowercase sequence represents the 454A and 454B primers while the uppercase sequence represents conserved regions of the 16S rRNA gene.

  • TABLE 2.

    Sequences obtained via pyrosequencing of our 20 March 2007 aeration basin wastewater sample

    Primer positionNo. of sequences generatedRead length (bp)aFraction of sequences with correct 5′ primer sequenceFraction of sequences with no N residuesNo. of sequences remaining after filteringb
    27F-337R15,141228.2 ± 57.00.960.8811,316
    967F-1046R15,12492.7 ± 13.60.950.9512,277
    967F-1177R18,873199.9 ± 41.60.960.7611,645
    Whole genome378,601250.4 ± 29.11
    • ↵ a Read lengths are given as means ± standard deviations.

    • ↵ b The filters removed any sequences where the reads (including nucleotides derived from the primer sequence) were below a size cutoff (70 bp for 967F-1046R and 150 bp for all others), did not start with the exact 5′ primer sequence, or had any N residues anywhere in the sequence.

  • TABLE 3.

    Number of sequences classified by RDP analysis scheme with a confidence score of >80%a

    RegionNo. of sequences assigned to:
    RootKingdomPhylumClassOrderFamilyGenusSpecies
    V1-V211,31611,31310,6469,8246,9794,6472,287205
    V610,95010,7787,3866,4104,8624,2571,780702
    V6-V711,64511,64310,1448,9546,5445,5632,554871
    Whole genome647435148136111101625
    • ↵ a See Fig. 2 and 3.

  • TABLE 4.

    Number of sequences classified by JGasta

    RegionNo. of sequences assigned to:
    RootKingdomPhylumClassOrderFamilyGenusSpecies
    V1-V211,31611,31611,13710,96810,1049,5136,907424
    V612,27711,80411,45111,3759,9389,5706,335524
    V6-V711,64511,64411,36711,2919,9629,7536,9681,277
    • ↵ a Assignment of sequences required that there be at least 85% sequence identity between the query sequence and the reference sequence in the Greengenes file and that the nearest neighbor(s) be classified with at least an 80% RDP confidence at the given taxon.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental material

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • Supplemental file 1 - Unfiltered Fasta sequences produced by our 454 run for all primer sets (File S1).
      Zipped FAS files, 1.8 MB.
    • Supplemental file 2 - Java code for JGast. (File S2).
      Zipped JAVA files, 274K.
    • Supplemental file 3 - Assignments generated by the RDP algorithm at a confidence score of 80% (File S3).
      Zipped MS Excel files, 5K.
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Effects of Experimental Choices and Analysis Noise on Surveys of the “Rare Biosphere”
Timothy J. Hamp, W. Joe Jones, Anthony A. Fodor
Applied and Environmental Microbiology May 2009, 75 (10) 3263-3270; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01931-08

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Applied and Environmental Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Effects of Experimental Choices and Analysis Noise on Surveys of the “Rare Biosphere”
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Applied and Environmental Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Applied and Environmental Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Effects of Experimental Choices and Analysis Noise on Surveys of the “Rare Biosphere”
Timothy J. Hamp, W. Joe Jones, Anthony A. Fodor
Applied and Environmental Microbiology May 2009, 75 (10) 3263-3270; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01931-08
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

bacteria
biodiversity
DNA Primers
molecular biology
RNA, Ribosomal, 16S
Water Microbiology

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AEM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AppEnvMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

 

Print ISSN: 0099-2240; Online ISSN: 1098-5336