4.6 Article

Performance Comparison of Illumina and Ion Torrent Next-Generation Sequencing Platforms for 16S rRNA-Based Bacterial Community Profiling

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 80, 期 24, 页码 7583-7591

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.02206-14

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [UL1TR000423]
  2. Life Technologies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High-throughput sequencing of the taxonomically informative 16S rRNA gene provides a powerful approach for exploring microbial diversity. Here we compare the performances of two common benchtop sequencing platforms, Illumina MiSeq and Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine (PGM), for bacterial community profiling by 16S rRNA (V1-V2) amplicon sequencing. We benchmarked performance by using a 20-organism mock bacterial community and a collection of primary human specimens. We observed comparatively higher error rates with the Ion Torrent platform and report a pattern of premature sequence truncation specific to semiconductor sequencing. Read truncation was dependent on both the directionality of sequencing and the target species, resulting in organism-specific biases in community profiles. We found that these sequencing artifacts could be minimized by using bidirectional amplicon sequencing and an optimized flow order on the Ion Torrent platform. Results of bacterial community profiling performed on the mock community and a collection of 18 human-derived microbiological specimens were generally in good agreement for both platforms; however, in some cases, results differed significantly. Disparities could be attributed to the failure to generate full-length reads for particular organisms on the Ion Torrent platform, organism-dependent differences in sequence error rates affecting classification of certain species, or some combination of these factors. This study demonstrates the potential for differential bias in bacterial community profiles resulting from the choice of sequencing platform alone.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据