Cargando…

Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore Technology for genome analysis of Francisella tularensis, Bacillus anthracis, and Brucella suis

BACKGROUND: Bacterial epidemiology needs to understand the spread and dissemination of strains in a One Health context. This is important for highly pathogenic bacteria such as Bacillus anthracis, Brucella species, and Francisella tularensis. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) has paved the way for genet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Linde, Jörg, Brangsch, Hanka, Hölzer, Martin, Thomas, Christine, Elschner, Mandy C., Melzer, Falk, Tomaso, Herbert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10182678/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37173617
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-023-09343-z
_version_ 1785041805561036800
author Linde, Jörg
Brangsch, Hanka
Hölzer, Martin
Thomas, Christine
Elschner, Mandy C.
Melzer, Falk
Tomaso, Herbert
author_facet Linde, Jörg
Brangsch, Hanka
Hölzer, Martin
Thomas, Christine
Elschner, Mandy C.
Melzer, Falk
Tomaso, Herbert
author_sort Linde, Jörg
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Bacterial epidemiology needs to understand the spread and dissemination of strains in a One Health context. This is important for highly pathogenic bacteria such as Bacillus anthracis, Brucella species, and Francisella tularensis. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) has paved the way for genetic marker detection and high-resolution genotyping. While such tasks are established for Illumina short-read sequencing, Oxford Nanopore Technology (ONT) long-read sequencing has yet to be evaluated for such highly pathogenic bacteria with little genomic variations between strains. In this study, three independent sequencing runs were performed using Illumina, ONT flow cell version 9.4.1, and 10.4 for six strains of each of Ba. anthracis, Br. suis and F. tularensis. Data from ONT sequencing alone, Illumina sequencing alone and two hybrid assembly approaches were compared. RESULTS: As previously shown, ONT produces ultra-long reads, while Illumina produces short reads with higher sequencing accuracy. Flow cell version 10.4 improved sequencing accuracy over version 9.4.1. The correct (sub-)species were inferred from all tested technologies, individually. Moreover, the sets of genetic markers for virulence, were almost identical for the respective species. The long reads of ONT allowed to assemble not only chromosomes of all species to near closure, but also virulence plasmids of Ba. anthracis. Assemblies based on nanopore data alone, Illumina data alone, and both hybrid assemblies correctly detected canonical (sub-)clades for Ba. anthracis and F. tularensis as well as multilocus sequence types for Br. suis. For F. tularensis, high-resolution genotyping using core-genome MLST (cgMLST) and core-genome Single-Nucleotide-Polymorphism (cgSNP) typing produced highly comparable results between data from Illumina and both ONT flow cell versions. For Ba. anthracis, only data from flow cell version 10.4 produced similar results to Illumina for both high-resolution typing methods. However, for Br. suis, high-resolution genotyping yielded larger differences comparing Illumina data to data from both ONT flow cell versions. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, combining data from ONT and Illumina for high-resolution genotyping might be feasible for F. tularensis and Ba. anthracis, but not yet for Br. suis. The ongoing improvement of nanopore technology and subsequent data analysis may facilitate high-resolution genotyping for all bacteria with highly stable genomes in future. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12864-023-09343-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10182678
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101826782023-05-14 Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore Technology for genome analysis of Francisella tularensis, Bacillus anthracis, and Brucella suis Linde, Jörg Brangsch, Hanka Hölzer, Martin Thomas, Christine Elschner, Mandy C. Melzer, Falk Tomaso, Herbert BMC Genomics Research BACKGROUND: Bacterial epidemiology needs to understand the spread and dissemination of strains in a One Health context. This is important for highly pathogenic bacteria such as Bacillus anthracis, Brucella species, and Francisella tularensis. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) has paved the way for genetic marker detection and high-resolution genotyping. While such tasks are established for Illumina short-read sequencing, Oxford Nanopore Technology (ONT) long-read sequencing has yet to be evaluated for such highly pathogenic bacteria with little genomic variations between strains. In this study, three independent sequencing runs were performed using Illumina, ONT flow cell version 9.4.1, and 10.4 for six strains of each of Ba. anthracis, Br. suis and F. tularensis. Data from ONT sequencing alone, Illumina sequencing alone and two hybrid assembly approaches were compared. RESULTS: As previously shown, ONT produces ultra-long reads, while Illumina produces short reads with higher sequencing accuracy. Flow cell version 10.4 improved sequencing accuracy over version 9.4.1. The correct (sub-)species were inferred from all tested technologies, individually. Moreover, the sets of genetic markers for virulence, were almost identical for the respective species. The long reads of ONT allowed to assemble not only chromosomes of all species to near closure, but also virulence plasmids of Ba. anthracis. Assemblies based on nanopore data alone, Illumina data alone, and both hybrid assemblies correctly detected canonical (sub-)clades for Ba. anthracis and F. tularensis as well as multilocus sequence types for Br. suis. For F. tularensis, high-resolution genotyping using core-genome MLST (cgMLST) and core-genome Single-Nucleotide-Polymorphism (cgSNP) typing produced highly comparable results between data from Illumina and both ONT flow cell versions. For Ba. anthracis, only data from flow cell version 10.4 produced similar results to Illumina for both high-resolution typing methods. However, for Br. suis, high-resolution genotyping yielded larger differences comparing Illumina data to data from both ONT flow cell versions. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, combining data from ONT and Illumina for high-resolution genotyping might be feasible for F. tularensis and Ba. anthracis, but not yet for Br. suis. The ongoing improvement of nanopore technology and subsequent data analysis may facilitate high-resolution genotyping for all bacteria with highly stable genomes in future. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12864-023-09343-z. BioMed Central 2023-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10182678/ /pubmed/37173617 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-023-09343-z Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Linde, Jörg
Brangsch, Hanka
Hölzer, Martin
Thomas, Christine
Elschner, Mandy C.
Melzer, Falk
Tomaso, Herbert
Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore Technology for genome analysis of Francisella tularensis, Bacillus anthracis, and Brucella suis
title Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore Technology for genome analysis of Francisella tularensis, Bacillus anthracis, and Brucella suis
title_full Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore Technology for genome analysis of Francisella tularensis, Bacillus anthracis, and Brucella suis
title_fullStr Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore Technology for genome analysis of Francisella tularensis, Bacillus anthracis, and Brucella suis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore Technology for genome analysis of Francisella tularensis, Bacillus anthracis, and Brucella suis
title_short Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore Technology for genome analysis of Francisella tularensis, Bacillus anthracis, and Brucella suis
title_sort comparison of illumina and oxford nanopore technology for genome analysis of francisella tularensis, bacillus anthracis, and brucella suis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10182678/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37173617
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-023-09343-z
work_keys_str_mv AT lindejorg comparisonofilluminaandoxfordnanoporetechnologyforgenomeanalysisoffrancisellatularensisbacillusanthracisandbrucellasuis
AT brangschhanka comparisonofilluminaandoxfordnanoporetechnologyforgenomeanalysisoffrancisellatularensisbacillusanthracisandbrucellasuis
AT holzermartin comparisonofilluminaandoxfordnanoporetechnologyforgenomeanalysisoffrancisellatularensisbacillusanthracisandbrucellasuis
AT thomaschristine comparisonofilluminaandoxfordnanoporetechnologyforgenomeanalysisoffrancisellatularensisbacillusanthracisandbrucellasuis
AT elschnermandyc comparisonofilluminaandoxfordnanoporetechnologyforgenomeanalysisoffrancisellatularensisbacillusanthracisandbrucellasuis
AT melzerfalk comparisonofilluminaandoxfordnanoporetechnologyforgenomeanalysisoffrancisellatularensisbacillusanthracisandbrucellasuis
AT tomasoherbert comparisonofilluminaandoxfordnanoporetechnologyforgenomeanalysisoffrancisellatularensisbacillusanthracisandbrucellasuis