FOMC Service Report

16S rRNA Gene V1V3 Amplicon Sequencing

Version V1.11

The Forsyth Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA
August 02, 2021

Project ID: FOMC4532


I. Project Summary

Project FOMC4532 services include NGS sequencing of the V3V4 region of the 16S rRNA amplicons from the samples. First and foremost, please download this report, as well as the sequence raw data from the download links provided below. These links will expire after 60 days. We cannot guarantee the availability of your data after 60 days.

Full Bioinformatics analysis service was requested. We provide many analyses, starting from the raw sequence quality and noise filtering, pair reads merging, as well as chimera filtering for the sequences, using the DADA2 denosing algorithm and pipeline.

We also provide many downstream analyses such as taxonomy assignment, alpha and beta diversity analyses, and differential abundance analysis.

For taxonomy assignment, most informative would be the taxonomy barplots. We provide an interactive barplots to show the relative abundance of microbes at different taxonomy levels (from Phylum to species) that you can choose.

If you specify which groups of samples you want to compare for differential abundance, we provide both ANCOM and LEfSe differential abundance analysis.

 

II. Workflow Checklist

1.Sample Received
2.Sample Quality Evaluated
3.Sample Prepared for Sequencing
4.Next-Gen Sequencing
5.Sequence Quality Check
6.Absolute Abundance
7.Report and Raw Sequence Data Available for Download
8.Bioinformatics Analysis - Reads Processing (DADA2 Quality Trimming, Denoising, Paired Reads Merging)
9.Bioinformatics Analysis - Reads Taxonomy Assignment
10.Bioinformatics Analysis - Alpha Diversity Analysis
11.Bioinformatics Analysis - Beta Diversity Analysis
12.Bioinformatics Analysis - Differential Abundance Analysis
13.Bioinformatics Analysis - Heatmap Profile
14.Bioinformatics Analysis - Network Association
 

III. NGS Sequencing

The samples were processed and analyzed with the ZymoBIOMICS® Service: Targeted Metagenomic Sequencing (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA).

DNA Extraction: If DNA extraction was performed, one of three different DNA extraction kits was used depending on the sample type and sample volume and were used according to the manufacturer’s instructions, unless otherwise stated. The kit used in this project is marked below:

ZymoBIOMICS® DNA Miniprep Kit (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA)
ZymoBIOMICS® DNA Microprep Kit (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA)
ZymoBIOMICS®-96 MagBead DNA Kit (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA)
N/A (DNA Extraction Not Performed)
Elution Volume: 50µL
Additional Notes: NA

Targeted Library Preparation: The DNA samples were prepared for targeted sequencing with the Quick-16S™ NGS Library Prep Kit (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA). These primers were custom designed by Zymo Research to provide the best coverage of the 16S gene while maintaining high sensitivity. The primer sets used in this project are marked below:

Quick-16S™ Primer Set V1-V2 (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA)
Quick-16S™ Primer Set V1-V3 (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA)
Quick-16S™ Primer Set V3-V4 (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA)
Quick-16S™ Primer Set V4 (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA)
Quick-16S™ Primer Set V6-V8 (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA)
Other: NA
Additional Notes: NA

The sequencing library was prepared using an innovative library preparation process in which PCR reactions were performed in real-time PCR machines to control cycles and therefore limit PCR chimera formation. The final PCR products were quantified with qPCR fluorescence readings and pooled together based on equal molarity. The final pooled library was cleaned up with the Select-a-Size DNA Clean & Concentrator™ (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA), then quantified with TapeStation® (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA) and Qubit® (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, WA).

Control Samples: The ZymoBIOMICS® Microbial Community Standard (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA) was used as a positive control for each DNA extraction, if performed. The ZymoBIOMICS® Microbial Community DNA Standard (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA) was used as a positive control for each targeted library preparation. Negative controls (i.e. blank extraction control, blank library preparation control) were included to assess the level of bioburden carried by the wet-lab process.

Sequencing: The final library was sequenced on Illumina® MiSeq™ with a V3 reagent kit (600 cycles). The sequencing was performed with 10% PhiX spike-in.

 

IV. Complete Report Download

The complete report of your project, including all links in this report, can be downloaded by clicking the link provided below. The downloaded file is a compressed ZIP file and once unzipped, open the file “REPORT.html” (may only shown as "REPORT" in your computer) by double clicking it. Your default web browser will open it and you will see the exact content of this report.

Please download and save the file to your computer storage device. The download link will expire after 60 days upon your receiving of this report.

Complete report download link:

To view the report, please follow the following steps:
1.Download the .zip file from the report link above.
2.Extract all the contents of the downloaded .zip file to your desktop.
3.Open the extracted folder and find the "REPORT.html" (may shown as only "REPORT").
4.Open (double-clicking) the REPORT.html file. Your default browser will open the top age of the complete report. Within the report, there are links to view all the analyses performed for the project.

 

V. Raw Sequence Data Download

The raw NGS sequence data is available for download with the link provided below. The data is a compressed ZIP file and can be unzipped to individual sequence files. Since this is a pair-end sequencing, each of your samples is represented by two sequence files, one for READ 1, with the file extension “*_R1.fastq.gz”, another READ 2, with the file extension “*_R1.fastq.gz”. The files are in FASTQ format and are compressed. FASTQ format is a text-based data format for storing both a biological sequence and its corresponding quality scores. Most sequence analysis software will be able to open them. The Sample IDs associated with the R1 and R2 fastq files are listed in the table below:

Sample IDRead 1 File NameRead 2 File Name
S10zr4532_10V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_10V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S11zr4532_11V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_11V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S12zr4532_12V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_12V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S13zr4532_13V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_13V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S14zr4532_14V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_14V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S15zr4532_15V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_15V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S16zr4532_16V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_16V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S17zr4532_17V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_17V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S18zr4532_18V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_18V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S19zr4532_19V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_19V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S01zr4532_1V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_1V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S20zr4532_20V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_20V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S21zr4532_21V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_21V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S22zr4532_22V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_22V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S23zr4532_23V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_23V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S24zr4532_24V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_24V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S25zr4532_25V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_25V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S26zr4532_26V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_26V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S27zr4532_27V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_27V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S28zr4532_28V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_28V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S29zr4532_29V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_29V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S02zr4532_2V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_2V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S30zr4532_30V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_30V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S31zr4532_31V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_31V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S32zr4532_32V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_32V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S33zr4532_33V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_33V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S03zr4532_3V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_3V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S04zr4532_4V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_4V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S05zr4532_5V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_5V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S06zr4532_6V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_6V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S07zr4532_7V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_7V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S08zr4532_8V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_8V3V4_R2.fastq.gz
S09zr4532_9V3V4_R1.fastq.gzzr4532_9V3V4_R2.fastq.gz

Please download and save the file to your computer storage device. The download link will expire after 60 days upon your receiving of this report.

Raw sequence data download link:

 

VI. Analysis - DADA2 Read Processing

What is DADA2?

DADA2 is a software package that models and corrects Illumina-sequenced amplicon errors. DADA2 infers sample sequences exactly, without coarse-graining into OTUs, and resolves differences of as little as one nucleotide. DADA2 identified more real variants and output fewer spurious sequences than other methods.

DADA2’s advantage is that it uses more of the data. The DADA2 error model incorporates quality information, which is ignored by all other methods after filtering. The DADA2 error model incorporates quantitative abundances, whereas most other methods use abundance ranks if they use abundance at all. The DADA2 error model identifies the differences between sequences, eg. A->C, whereas other methods merely count the mismatches. DADA2 can parameterize its error model from the data itself, rather than relying on previous datasets that may or may not reflect the PCR and sequencing protocols used in your study.

DADA2 Publication: Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJ, Holmes SP. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods. 2016 Jul;13(7):581-3. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3869. Epub 2016 May 23. PMID: 27214047; PMCID: PMC4927377.

DADA2 Software Package is available as an R package at : https://benjjneb.github.io/dada2/index.html

Analysis Procedures:

DADA2 pipeline includes several tools for read quality control, including quality filtering, trimming, denoising, pair merging and chimera filtering. Below are the major processing steps of DADA2:

Step 1. Read trimming based on sequence quality The quality of NGS Illumina sequences often decreases toward the end of the reads. DADA2 allows to trim off the poor quality read ends in order to improve the error model building and pair mergicing performance.

Step 2. Learn the Error Rates The DADA2 algorithm makes use of a parametric error model (err) and every amplicon dataset has a different set of error rates. The learnErrors method learns this error model from the data, by alternating estimation of the error rates and inference of sample composition until they converge on a jointly consistent solution. As in many machine-learning problems, the algorithm must begin with an initial guess, for which the maximum possible error rates in this data are used (the error rates if only the most abundant sequence is correct and all the rest are errors).

Step 3. Infer amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) based on the error model built in previous step. This step is also called sequence "denoising". The outcome of this step is a list of ASVs that are the equivalent of oligonucleotides.

Step 4. Merge paired reads. If the sequencing products are read pairs, DADA2 will merge the R1 and R2 ASVs into single sequences. Merging is performed by aligning the denoised forward reads with the reverse-complement of the corresponding denoised reverse reads, and then constructing the merged “contig” sequences. By default, merged sequences are only output if the forward and reverse reads overlap by at least 12 bases, and are identical to each other in the overlap region (but these conditions can be changed via function arguments).

Step 5. Remove chimera. The core dada method corrects substitution and indel errors, but chimeras remain. Fortunately, the accuracy of sequence variants after denoising makes identifying chimeric ASVs simpler than when dealing with fuzzy OTUs. Chimeric sequences are identified if they can be exactly reconstructed by combining a left-segment and a right-segment from two more abundant “parent” sequences. The frequency of chimeric sequences varies substantially from dataset to dataset, and depends on on factors including experimental procedures and sample complexity.

Results

1. Read Quality Plots NGS sequence analaysis starts with visualizing the quality of the sequencing. Below are the quality plots of the first sample for the R1 and R2 reads separately. In gray-scale is a heat map of the frequency of each quality score at each base position. The mean quality score at each position is shown by the green line, and the quartiles of the quality score distribution by the orange lines. The forward reads are usually of better quality. It is a common practice to trim the last few nucleotides to avoid less well-controlled errors that can arise there. The trimming affects the downstream steps including error model building, merging and chimera calling. FOMC uses an empirical approach to test many combinations of different trim length in order to achieve best final amplicon sequence variants (ASVs), see the next section “Optimal trim length for ASVs”.

Below is the link to a PDF file for viewing the quality plots for all samples:

2. Optimal trim length for ASVs The final number of merged and chimera-filtered ASVs depends on the quality filtering (hence trimming) in the very beginning of the DADA2 pipeline. In order to achieve highest number of ASVs, an empirical approach was used -

  1. Create a random subset of each sample consisting of 5,000 R1 and 5,000 R2 (to reduce computation time)
  2. Trim 10 bases at a time from the ends of both R1 and R2 up to 50 bases
  3. For each combination of trimmed length (e.g., 300x300, 300x290, 290x290 etc), the trimmed reads are subject to the entire DADA2 pipeline for chimera-filtered merged ASVs
  4. The combination with highest percentage of the input reads becoming final ASVs is selected for the complete set of data

Below is the result of such operation, showing ASV percentages of total reads for all trimming combinations (1st Column = R1 lengths in bases; 1st Row = R2 lengths in bases):

R1/R2281271261251241231
32146.85%44.10%43.33%43.49%42.54%41.20%
31145.43%43.10%42.65%42.77%42.01%41.51%
30144.82%43.05%42.20%41.80%40.45%40.06%
29144.51%42.58%41.68%41.39%40.40%40.03%
28143.82%41.65%41.00%40.36%40.12%39.89%
27144.14%41.93%41.09%40.49%40.27%39.73%

Based on the above result, the trim length combination of R1 = 321 bases and R2 = 281 bases (highlighted red above), was chosen for generating final ASVs for all sequences. This combination generated highest number of merged non-chimeric ASVs and was used for downstream analyses, if requested.

3. Error plots from learning the error rates After DADA2 building the error model for the set of data, it is always worthwhile, as a sanity check if nothing else, to visualize the estimated error rates. The error rates for each possible transition (A→C, A→G, …) are shown below. Points are the observed error rates for each consensus quality score. The black line shows the estimated error rates after convergence of the machine-learning algorithm. The red line shows the error rates expected under the nominal definition of the Q-score. The ideal result would be the estimated error rates (black line) are a good fit to the observed rates (points), and the error rates drop with increased quality as expected.

Forward Read R1 Error Plot


Reverse Read R2 Error Plot

The PDF version of these plots are available here:

 

4. DADA2 Result Summary The table below shows the summary of the DADA2 analysis, tracking paired read counts of each samples for all the steps during DADA2 denoising process - including end-trimming (filtered), denoising (denoisedF, denoisedF), pair merging (merged) and chimera removal (nonchim).

Sample IDF4532.S01F4532.S02F4532.S03F4532.S04F4532.S05F4532.S06F4532.S07F4532.S08F4532.S09F4532.S10F4532.S11F4532.S12F4532.S13F4532.S14F4532.S15F4532.S16F4532.S17F4532.S18F4532.S19F4532.S20F4532.S21F4532.S22F4532.S23F4532.S24F4532.S25F4532.S26F4532.S27F4532.S28F4532.S29F4532.S30F4532.S31F4532.S32F4532.S33Row SumPercentage
input56,90867,15655,67270,89372,43183,11372,12966,91461,59767,69160,16764,63565,28560,44844,32768,10653,83962,73860,45966,92964,22762,52062,98979,96350,75365,80762,06868,12164,80968,61057,31572,39462,7352,123,748100.00%
filtered32,38446,25937,79046,75847,45355,73847,10041,47739,33841,97135,76239,52039,88340,6514,63546,51235,23538,70840,34444,85342,41939,26437,46152,73128,04843,02938,81143,00340,84942,73336,55049,01539,1271,335,41162.88%
denoisedF30,84245,83137,41044,61245,99554,33646,64341,19138,92741,84335,60839,25639,80440,3754,54646,45235,16438,53938,52143,30841,25038,68637,13452,31327,91042,84738,69842,94240,78542,67736,41548,96239,0701,318,89262.10%
denoisedR31,21845,98437,60445,23746,37855,07146,51740,84939,02241,89635,61239,25339,52940,3854,57946,47035,18138,61238,94943,82441,73138,47636,83251,78127,64542,61238,53342,76940,76342,45536,50048,98238,8451,320,09462.16%
merged26,36445,28736,81539,91041,70550,74045,16639,12936,43741,33535,15138,64439,07639,8944,45046,25035,00938,14733,54639,74238,43436,90835,58649,54027,20841,98037,95442,23040,29841,85136,15648,71238,3961,268,05059.71%
nonchim7,4098,7206,0119,2298,0669,5707,0426,5644,4987,6156,6757,5198,0807,5112,31210,0567,4587,0917,8827,8426,6854,7175,1295,8754,3516,5526,0398,3668,8938,2258,14110,6177,639238,37911.22%

This table can be downloaded as an Excel table below:

 

5. DADA2 Amplicon Sequence Variants (ASVs). A total of 2299 unique merged and chimera-free ASV sequences were identified, and their corresponding read counts for each sample are available in the "ASV Read Count Table" with rows for the ASV sequences and columns for sample. This read count table can be used for microbial profile comparison among different samples and the sequences provided in the table can be used to taxonomy assignment.

 

The table can be downloaded from this link:

 
 
 
 

VII. Analysis - Read Taxonomy Assignment

Read Taxonomy Assignment - Methods

 

The species-level, open-reference 16S rRNA NGS reads taxonomy assignment pipeline

Version 20210310
 

1. Raw sequences reads in FASTA format were BLASTN-searched against a combined set of 16S rRNA reference sequences. It consists of MOMD (version 0.1), the HOMD (version 15.2 http://www.homd.org/index.php?name=seqDownload&file&type=R ), HOMD 16S rRNA RefSeq Extended Version 1.1 (EXT), GreenGene Gold (GG) (http://greengenes.lbl.gov/Download/Sequence_Data/Fasta_data_files/gold_strains_gg16S_aligned.fasta.gz) , and the NCBI 16S rRNA reference sequence set (https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/blast/db/16S_ribosomal_RNA.tar.gz). These sequences were screened and combined to remove short sequences (<1000nt), chimera, duplicated and sub-sequences, as well as sequences with poor taxonomy annotation (e.g., without species information). This process resulted in 1,015 from HOMD V15.22, 495 from EXT, 3,940 from GG and 18,044 from NCBI, a total of 25,120 sequences. Altogether these sequence represent a total of 15,601 oral and non-oral microbial species.

The NCBI BLASTN version 2.7.1+ (Zhang et al, 2000) was used with the default parameters. Reads with ≥ 98% sequence identity to the matched reference and ≥ 90% alignment length (i.e., ≥ 90% of the read length that was aligned to the reference and was used to calculate the sequence percent identity) were classified based on the taxonomy of the reference sequence with highest sequence identity. If a read matched with reference sequences representing more than one species with equal percent identity and alignment length, it was subject to chimera checking with USEARCH program version v8.1.1861 (Edgar 2010). Non-chimeric reads with multi-species best hits were considered valid and were assigned with a unique species notation (e.g., spp) denoting unresolvable multiple species.

2. Unassigned reads (i.e., reads with < 98% identity or < 90% alignment length) were pooled together and reads < 200 bases were removed. The remaining reads were subject to the de novo operational taxonomy unit (OTU) calling and chimera checking using the USEARCH program version v8.1.1861 (Edgar 2010). The de novo OTU calling and chimera checking was done using 98% as the sequence identity cutoff, i.e., the species-level OTU. The output of this step produced species-level de novo clustered OTUs with 98% identity. Representative reads from each of the OTUs/species were then BLASTN-searched against the same reference sequence set again to determine the closest species for these potential novel species. These potential novel species were pooled together with the reads that were signed to specie-level in the previous step, for down-stream analyses.

Reference:
Edgar RC. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics. 2010 Oct 1;26(19):2460-1. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq461. Epub 2010 Aug 12. PubMed PMID: 20709691.

3. Designations used in the taxonomy:

	1) Taxonomy levels are indicated by these prefixes:
	
	   k__: domain/kingdom
	   p__: phylum
	   c__: class
	   o__: order
	   f__: family
	   g__: genus  
	   s__: species
	
	   Example: 
	
	   k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae;g__Blautia;s__faecis
		
	2) Unique level identified – known species:
	   
	   k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae;g__Roseburia;s__hominis
	
	   The above example shows some reads match to a single species (all levels are unique)
	
	3) Non-unique level identified – known species:

	   k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae;g__Roseburia;s__multispecies_spp123_3
	   
	   The above example “s__multispecies_spp123_3” indicates certain reads equally match to 3 species of the 
	   genus Roseburia; the “spp123” is a temporally assigned species ID.
	
	   k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae;g__multigenus;s__multispecies_spp234_5
	   
	   The above example indicates certain reads match equally to 5 different species, which belong to multiple genera.; 
	   the “spp234” is a temporally assigned species ID.
	
	4) Unique level identified – unknown species, potential novel species:
	   
	   k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae;g__Roseburia;s__ hominis_nov_97%
	   
	   The above example indicates that some reads have no match to any of the reference sequences with 
	   sequence identity ≥ 98% and percent coverage (alignment length)  ≥ 98% as well. However this groups 
	   of reads (actually the representative read from a de novo  OTU) has 96% percent identity to 
	   Roseburia hominis, thus this is a potential novel species, closest to Roseburia hominis. 
	   (But they are not the same species).
	
	5) Multiple level identified – unknown species, potential novel species:
	   k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae;g__Roseburia;s__ multispecies_sppn123_3_nov_96%
	
	   The above example indicates that some reads have no match to any of the reference sequences 
	   with sequence identity ≥ 98% and percent coverage (alignment length)  ≥ 98% as well. 
	   However this groups of reads (actually the representative read from a de novo  OTU) 
	   has 96% percent identity equally to 3 species in Roseburia. Thus this is no single 
	   closest species, instead this group of reads match equally to multiple species at 96%. 
	   Since they have passed chimera check so they represent a novel species. “sppn123” is a 
	   temporary ID for this potential novel species. 

 
4. The taxonomy assignment algorithm is illustrated in this flow char below:
 
 
 
 

Read Taxonomy Assignment - Result Summary

CodeCategoryRead Count (MC=1)*Read Count (MC=100)*
ATotal reads238,379238,379
BTotal assigned reads235,575235,575
CAssigned reads in species with read count < MC0984
DAssigned reads in samples with read count < 50000
ETotal samples3333
FSamples with reads >= 5003333
GSamples with reads < 50000
HTotal assigned reads used for analysis (B-C-D)235,575234,591
IReads assigned to single species118,230118,140
JReads assigned to multiple species116,185115,731
KReads assigned to novel species1,160720
LTotal number of species8543
MNumber of single species2420
NNumber of multi-species3020
ONumber of novel species313
PTotal unassigned reads2,8042,804
QChimeric reads2727
RReads without BLASTN hits44
SOthers: short, low quality, singletons, etc.2,7732,773
A=B+P=C+D+H+Q+R+S
E=F+G
B=C+D+H
H=I+J+K
L=M+N+O
P=Q+R+S
* MC = Minimal Count per species, species with total read count < MC were removed.
* The assignment result from MC=100 was used in the downstream analyses.
 
 

Read Taxonomy Assignment - Sample Meta Information

#SampleIDSampleNameTimeGroup
F4532.S01Gal.A1week1NA
F4532.S02Gal.E1week1NA
F4532.S03Gal.N1week1NA
F4532.S04Gal.A2week2WT
F4532.S05Gal.B2week2WT
F4532.S06Gal.C2week2WT
F4532.S07Gal.D2week2gal low
F4532.S08Gal.E2week2gal low
F4532.S09Gal.F2week2gal low
F4532.S10Gal.G2week2gal high
F4532.S11Gal.H2week2gal high
F4532.S12Gal.I2week2gal high
F4532.S13Gal.J2week2inu low
F4532.S14Gal.K2week2inu low
F4532.S15Gal.L2week2inu low
F4532.S16Gal.M2week2inul high
F4532.S17Gal.N2week2inul high
F4532.S18Gal.O2week2inul high
F4532.S19Gal.A3week3WT
F4532.S20Gal.B3week3WT
F4532.S21Gal.C3week3WT
F4532.S22Gal.D3week3gal low
F4532.S23Gal.E3week3gal low
F4532.S24Gal.F3week3gal low
F4532.S25Gal.G3week3gal high
F4532.S26Gal.H3week3gal high
F4532.S27Gal.I3week3gal high
F4532.S28Gal.J3week3inu low
F4532.S29Gal.K3week3inu low
F4532.S30Gal.L3week3inu low
F4532.S31Gal.M3week3inul high
F4532.S32Gal.N3week3inul high
F4532.S33Gal.O3week3inul high
 
 

Read Taxonomy Assignment - ASV Read Counts by Samples

#Sample IDRead Count
F4532.S152312
F4532.S254351
F4532.S094498
F4532.S224717
F4532.S235129
F4532.S245875
F4532.S036011
F4532.S276039
F4532.S266552
F4532.S086564
F4532.S116675
F4532.S216685
F4532.S077042
F4532.S187091
F4532.S017409
F4532.S177458
F4532.S147511
F4532.S127519
F4532.S107615
F4532.S337639
F4532.S207842
F4532.S197882
F4532.S058066
F4532.S138080
F4532.S318141
F4532.S308225
F4532.S288366
F4532.S028720
F4532.S298893
F4532.S049229
F4532.S069570
F4532.S1610056
F4532.S3210617
 
 

Read Taxonomy Assignment - ASV Read Counts Table

SPIDTaxonomyF4532.S01F4532.S02F4532.S03F4532.S04F4532.S05F4532.S06F4532.S07F4532.S08F4532.S09F4532.S10F4532.S11F4532.S12F4532.S13F4532.S14F4532.S15F4532.S16F4532.S17F4532.S18F4532.S19F4532.S20F4532.S21F4532.S22F4532.S23F4532.S24F4532.S25F4532.S26F4532.S27F4532.S28F4532.S29F4532.S30F4532.S31F4532.S32F4532.S33
SP1k__Bacteria;p__Actinobacteria;c__Coriobacteriia;o__Coriobacteriales;f__Atopobiaceae;g__Atopobium;s__parvulum9642000245390000000000000016480704000000000
SP14k__Bacteria;p__Actinobacteria;c__Actinobacteria;o__Bifidobacteriales;f__Bifidobacteriaceae;g__Bifidobacterium;s__dentium136600750663913165891498730463413252913631434912203072715598447189031871621250313481939169387817217322811278
SP2k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Enterococcaceae;g__Enterococcus;s__casseliflavus00110000769156340000000004341354603877024551150000001050
SP20k__Bacteria;p__Fusobacteria;c__Fusobacteria;o__Fusobacteriales;f__Fusobacteriaceae;g__Fusobacterium;s__nucleatum_ss_animalis800014811625300000000000086106290000012000000
SP3k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Negativicutes;o__Veillonellales;f__Veillonellaceae;g__Veillonella;s__parvula012401846520904560000000000372300311277480327000000000
SP39k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Erysipelotrichi;o__Erysipelotrichales;f__Erysipelotrichaceae;g__Solobacterium;s__moorei24400342275991100001100000030832247002000000000
SP4k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Streptococcaceae;g__Streptococcus;s__intermedius28300000000000000000000000000000000
SP40k__Bacteria;p__Actinobacteria;c__Coriobacteriia;o__Coriobacteriales;f__Atopobiaceae;g__Atopobium;s__rimae4390027825900000000000001571710000000000000
SP47k__Bacteria;p__Proteobacteria;c__Betaproteobacteria;o__Neisseriales;f__Neisseriaceae;g__Eikenella;s__corrodens000118380000000000000603332000000000000
SP48k__Bacteria;p__Bacteroidetes;c__Bacteroidia;o__Bacteroidales;f__Prevotellaceae;g__Prevotella;s__oris00083390000000000000123028000000000000
SP5k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Streptococcaceae;g__Streptococcus;s__anginosus000862152721963041930216182271000135001077165220754772911059538853731000000
SP55k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Negativicutes;o__Veillonellales;f__Veillonellaceae;g__Dialister;s__invisus000420154110420000000000047830925416200000000000
SP56k__Bacteria;p__Actinobacteria;c__Actinobacteria;o__Actinomycetales;f__Actinomycetaceae;g__Schaalia;s__sp._HMT_180559004213153250000017000000367256202000000000000
SP6k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Streptococcaceae;g__Streptococcus;s__mutans4977251344810874943657543337657346243151436162757014761274338524430011824309326404300000
SP61k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae_[XIV];g__Stomatobaculum;s__sp._HMT_91000047500000005400000029700000007000000
SP7k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Negativicutes;o__Selenomonadales;f__Selenomonadaceae;g__Selenomonas;s__sp._HMT_1492300759014143380000000000543745000000000000
SP70k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae;g__Stomatobaculum;s__longum19100922811120000000000000121112000000000000
SP71k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae_[XIV];g__Lachnoanaerobaculum;s__orale2390002133790000000000000286182000000000000
SP78k__Bacteria;p__Bacteroidetes;c__Bacteroidia;o__Bacteroidales;f__Prevotellaceae;g__Prevotella;s__salivae15400034337719000000000000271248000000000000
SP82k__Bacteria;p__Actinobacteria;c__Coriobacteriia;o__Coriobacteriales;f__Atopobiaceae;g__Olsenella;s__uli215001871341550000000000009681593600000000000
SPN3k__Bacteria;p__Actinobacteria;c__Coriobacteriia;o__Coriobacteriales;f__Atopobiaceae;g__Atopobium;s__rimae000946620800000000000650000131557000000
SPN8k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae_[XIVa];g__Oribacterium;s__sp._Oral_Taxon_78000000000009978000094000000000000900
SPP1k__Bacteria;p__Fusobacteria;c__Fusobacteria;o__Fusobacteriales;f__Fusobacteriaceae;g__Fusobacterium;s__multispecies_spp1_40004024614220000000000003903990000000000000
SPP10k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Streptococcaceae;g__Streptococcus;s__multispecies_spp10_40351214400047620899419824173967648811279979897731136870000000006660756965047372102296361
SPP12k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Streptococcaceae;g__Streptococcus;s__multispecies_spp12_1817014121213631329721421470000004000000215000000000000
SPP13k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Streptococcaceae;g__Streptococcus;s__multispecies_spp13_19050130004200000000000000000000000000
SPP14k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Streptococcaceae;g__Streptococcus;s__multispecies_spp14_20200380870000000000000042000000000000
SPP15k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Negativicutes;o__Veillonellales;f__Veillonellaceae;g__Veillonella;s__multispecies_spp15_2324130013623522855198000000000001340000000000000
SPP16k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Peptoniphilaceae;g__Parvimonas;s__multispecies_spp16_331200371209191000001900000057452640000007000000
SPP17k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__Lachnospiraceae_[XIV];g__Oribacterium;s__multispecies_spp17_22030075028716500000000000191148135000000000000
SPP18k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__multiclass;o__multiorder;f__Selenomonadaceae;g__Selenomonas;s__multispecies_spp18_224600447176310000000000000363294257000000000000
SPP2k__Bacteria;p__Fusobacteria;c__Fusobacteriia;o__Fusobacteriales;f__Fusobacteriaceae;g__Fusobacterium;s__multispecies_spp2_2220033302500000000000013242000000000000
SPP20k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Clostridia;o__Clostridiales;f__multifamily;g__multigenus;s__multispecies_spp20_318200286181000000000000026613049000000000000
SPP21k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__multiclass;o__multiorder;f__Selenomonadaceae;g__Selenomonas;s__multispecies_spp21_2122003522633601240000000000025096171000000000000
SPP23k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Lactobacillaceae;g__Lactobacillus;s__multispecies_spp23_200000000000000000000000270000000000
SPP24k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Carnobacteriaceae;g__Granulicatella;s__multispecies_spp24_22670046027239100000148000000330239000000000000
SPP25k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Streptococcaceae;g__Streptococcus;s__multispecies_spp25_2121980000000000000000000000000000000
SPP27k__Bacteria;p__Bacteroidetes;c__Bacteroidia;o__Bacteroidales;f__Prevotellaceae;g__Prevotella;s__multispecies_spp27_2610000157900000000000000000000000000
SPP3k__Bacteria;p__Fusobacteria;c__Fusobacteriia;o__Fusobacteriales;f__Fusobacteriaceae;g__Fusobacterium;s__multispecies_spp3_31500220580000000000003400000000000000
SPP4k__Bacteria;p__Fusobacteria;c__Fusobacteria;o__Fusobacteriales;f__Fusobacteriaceae;g__Fusobacterium;s__multispecies_spp4_2296002332714072550000111000000167226259000000000000
SPP8k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Negativicutes;o__Veillonellales;f__Veillonellaceae;g__Veillonella;s__multispecies_spp8_22462190347294231319443223001050000002593253478833981001000000000
SPP9k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__multiclass;o__Clostridiales;f__Veillonellaceae;g__Veillonella;s__multispecies_spp9_38342035450060000000000000009000000000
SPPN4k__Bacteria;p__Firmicutes;c__Bacilli;o__Lactobacillales;f__Enterococcaceae;g__Enterococcus;s__multispecies_sppn4_5_nov_94.658%0000000000000000000034028103000000000
 
 
Download Read Count Tables at Different Taxonomy Levels
domain
phylum
class
order
family
genus
species
;
 

Sample Taxonomy Bar Plots

 

VIII. Analysis - Alpha Diversity

 

In ecology, alpha diversity (α-diversity) is the mean species diversity in sites or habitats at a local scale. The term was introduced by R. H. Whittaker[1][2] together with the terms beta diversity (β-diversity) and gamma diversity (γ-diversity). Whittaker's idea was that the total species diversity in a landscape (gamma diversity) is determined by two different things, the mean species diversity in sites or habitats at a more local scale (alpha diversity) and the differentiation among those habitats (beta diversity).

References:
Whittaker, R. H. (1960) Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and California. Ecological Monographs, 30, 279–338. doi:10.2307/1943563
Whittaker, R. H. (1972). Evolution and Measurement of Species Diversity. Taxon, 21, 213-251. doi:10.2307/1218190

 

Boxplot of Alpha-diversity indices

The two main factors taken into account when measuring diversity are richness and evenness. Richness is a measure of the number of different kinds of organisms present in a particular area. Evenness compares the similarity of the population size of each of the species present. There are many different ways to measure the richness and evenness. These measurements are called "estimators" or "indices". Below is a diversity of 3 commonly used indices showing the values for all the samples (dots) and in groups (boxes).

 
 
 
 
 

Alpha diversity analysis by rarefaction

Diversity measures are affected by the sampling depth. Rarefaction is a technique to assess species richness from the results of sampling. Rarefaction allows the calculation of species richness for a given number of individual samples, based on the construction of so-called rarefaction curves. This curve is a plot of the number of species as a function of the number of samples. Rarefaction curves generally grow rapidly at first, as the most common species are found, but the curves plateau as only the rarest species remain to be sampled.

References:
Willis AD. Rarefaction, Alpha Diversity, and Statistics. Front Microbiol. 2019 Oct 23;10:2407. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02407. PMID: 31708888; PMCID: PMC6819366.

 
 

IX. Analysis - Beta Diversity

 

NMDS and PCoA Plots

Beta diversity compares the similarity (or dissimilarity) of microbial profiles between different groups of samples. There are many different similarity/dissimilarity metrics. In general, they can be quantitative (using sequence abundance, e.g., Bray-Curtis or weighted UniFrac) or binary (considering only presence-absence of sequences, e.g., binary Jaccard or unweighted UniFrac). They can be even based on phylogeny (e.g., UniFrac metrics) or not (non-UniFrac metrics, such as Bray-Curtis, etc.).

For microbiome studies, species profiles of samples can be compared with the Bray-Curtis dissimilarity, which is based on the count data type. The pair-wise Bray-Curtis dissimilarity matrix of all samples can then be subject to either multi-dimensional scaling (MDS, also known as PCoA) or non-metric MDS (NMDS).

MDS/PCoA is a scaling or ordination method that starts with a matrix of similarities or dissimilarities between a set of samples and aims to produce a low-dimensional graphical plot of the data in such a way that distances between points in the plot are close to original dissimilarities.

NMDS is similar to MDS, however it does not use the dissimilarities data, instead it converts them into the ranks and use these ranks in the calculation.

In our beta diversity analysis, Bray-Curtis dissimilarity matrix was first calculated and then plotted by the PCoA and NMDS separately. The results are shown below:

 
 
 
 
 

The above PCoA and NMDS plots are based on count data. The count data can also be transformed into centered log ratio (CLR) for each species. The CLR data is no longer count data and cannot be used in Bray-Curtis dissimilarity calculation. Instead CLR can be compared with Euclidean distances. When CLR data are compared by Euclidean distance, the distance is also called Aitchison distance.

Below are the NMDS and PCoA plots of the Aitchison distances of the samples:

 
 
 
 
 

Interactive 3D PCoA Plots - Bray-Curtis Dissimilarity

 
 
 

Interactive 3D PCoA Plots - Euclidean Distance

 
 
 

Interactive 3D PCoA Plots - Correlation Coefficients

 
 
 

X. Analysis - Differential Abundance

16S rRNA next generation sequencing (NGS) generates a fixed number of reads that reflect the proportion of different species in a sample, i.e., the relative abundance of species, instead of the absolute abundance. In Mathematics, measurements involving probabilities, proportions, percentages, and ppm can all be thought of as compositional data. This makes the microbiome read count data “compositional” (Gloor et al, 2017). In general, compositional data represent parts of a whole which only carry relative information (http://www.compositionaldata.com/).

The problem of microbiome data being compositional arises when comparing two groups of samples for identifying “differentially abundant” species. A species with the same absolute abundance between two conditions, its relative abundances in the two conditions (e.g., percent abundance) can become different if the relative abundance of other species change greatly. This problem can lead to incorrect conclusion in terms of differential abundance for microbial species in the samples.

When studying differential abundance (DA), the current better approach is to transform the read count data into log ratio data. The ratios are calculated between read counts of all species in a sample to a “reference” count (e.g., mean read count of the sample). The log ratio data allow the detection of DA species without being affected by percentage bias mentioned above

In this report, a compositional DA analysis tool “ANCOM” (analysis of composition of microbiomes) was used. ANCOM transforms the count data into log-ratios and thus is more suitable for comparing the composition of microbiomes in two or more populations

References:

Gloor GB, Macklaim JM, Pawlowsky-Glahn V, Egozcue JJ. Microbiome Datasets Are Compositional: And This Is Not Optional. Front Microbiol. 2017 Nov 15;8:2224. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.02224. PMID: 29187837; PMCID: PMC5695134.

Mandal S, Van Treuren W, White RA, Eggesbø M, Knight R, Peddada SD. Analysis of composition of microbiomes: a novel method for studying microbial composition. Microb Ecol Health Dis. 2015 May 29;26:27663. doi: 10.3402/mehd.v26.27663. PMID: 26028277; PMCID: PMC4450248.

 

ANCOM differential abundance analysis

 
View ANCOM results
Comparison No.Comparison Name
Comparison 1.WT vs. Treatments
Comparison 2.Time
 
 
 

LEfSe - Linear Discriminant Analysis Effect Size

LEfSe (Linear Discriminant Analysis Effect Size) is an alternative method to find "organisms, genes, or pathways that consistently explain the differences between two or more microbial communities" (Segata et al., 2011). Specifically, LEfSe uses rank-based Kruskal-Wallis (KW) sum-rank test to detect features with significant differential (relative) abundance with respect to the class of interest. Since it is rank-based, instead of proportional based, the differential species identified among the comparison groups is less biased (than percent abundance based).

Reference:

Segata N, Izard J, Waldron L, Gevers D, Miropolsky L, Garrett WS, Huttenhower C. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biol. 2011 Jun 24;12(6):R60. doi: 10.1186/gb-2011-12-6-r60. PMID: 21702898; PMCID: PMC3218848.

 
WT vs. Treatments
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
All LEfSe Comparisons
Comparison No.Comparison Name
Comparison 1.WT vs. Treatments
Comparison 2.Time
 
 

XI. Analysis - Heatmap Profile

 

Species vs sample abundance heatmap

 
 
 

XII. Analysis - Network Association

To analyze the co-occurrence or co-exclusion between microbial species among different samples, network correlation analysis tools are usually used for this purpose. However, microbiome count data are compositional. If count data are normalized to the total number of counts in the sample, the data become not independent and traditional statistical metrics (e.g., correlation) for the detection of specie-species relationships can lead to spurious results. In addition, sequencing-based studies typically measure hundreds of OTUs (species) on few samples; thus, inference of OTU-OTU association networks is severely under-powered. Here we use SPIEC-EASI (SParse InversE Covariance Estimation for Ecological Association Inference), a statistical method for the inference of microbial ecological networks from amplicon sequencing datasets that addresses both of these issues (Kurtz et al., 2015). SPIEC-EASI combines data transformations developed for compositional data analysis with a graphical model inference framework that assumes the underlying ecological association network is sparse. SPIEC-EASI provides two algorithms for network inferencing – 1) Meinshausen-Bühlmann's neighborhood selection (MB method) and inverse covariance selection (GLASSO method, i.e., graphical least absolute shrinkage and selection operator). This is fundamentally distinct from SparCC, which essentially estimate pairwise correlations. In addition to these two methods, we provide the results of a third method - SparCC (Sparse Correlations for Compositional Data)(Friedman & Alm 2012), which is also a method for inferring correlations from compositional data. SparCC estimates the linear Pearson correlations between the log-transformed components.

References:

Kurtz ZD, Müller CL, Miraldi ER, Littman DR, Blaser MJ, Bonneau RA. Sparse and compositionally robust inference of microbial ecological networks. PLoS Comput Biol. 2015 May 7;11(5):e1004226. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004226. PMID: 25950956; PMCID: PMC4423992.

Friedman J, Alm EJ. Inferring correlation networks from genomic survey data. PLoS Comput Biol. 2012;8(9):e1002687. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002687. Epub 2012 Sep 20. PMID: 23028285; PMCID: PMC3447976.

 

SPIEC-EASI network inference by neighborhood selection (MB method)

 

 

 

SPIEC-EASI network inference by inverse covariance selection (GLASSO method)

 

 

 

Association network inference by SparCC

 

 

 
 

Copyright FOMC 2021