Cargando…

Bacterial Diversity Assessment in Antarctic Terrestrial and Aquatic Microbial Mats: A Comparison between Bidirectional Pyrosequencing and Cultivation

The application of high-throughput sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene has increased the size of microbial diversity datasets by several orders of magnitude, providing improved access to the rare biosphere compared with cultivation-based approaches and more established cultivation-independent techniques...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tytgat, Bjorn, Verleyen, Elie, Obbels, Dagmar, Peeters, Karolien, De Wever, Aaike, D’hondt, Sofie, De Meyer, Tim, Van Criekinge, Wim, Vyverman, Wim, Willems, Anne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4041716/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24887330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0097564
_version_ 1782318705374396416
author Tytgat, Bjorn
Verleyen, Elie
Obbels, Dagmar
Peeters, Karolien
De Wever, Aaike
D’hondt, Sofie
De Meyer, Tim
Van Criekinge, Wim
Vyverman, Wim
Willems, Anne
author_facet Tytgat, Bjorn
Verleyen, Elie
Obbels, Dagmar
Peeters, Karolien
De Wever, Aaike
D’hondt, Sofie
De Meyer, Tim
Van Criekinge, Wim
Vyverman, Wim
Willems, Anne
author_sort Tytgat, Bjorn
collection PubMed
description The application of high-throughput sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene has increased the size of microbial diversity datasets by several orders of magnitude, providing improved access to the rare biosphere compared with cultivation-based approaches and more established cultivation-independent techniques. By contrast, cultivation-based approaches allow the retrieval of both common and uncommon bacteria that can grow in the conditions used and provide access to strains for biotechnological applications. We performed bidirectional pyrosequencing of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene diversity in two terrestrial and seven aquatic Antarctic microbial mat samples previously studied by heterotrophic cultivation. While, not unexpectedly, 77.5% of genera recovered by pyrosequencing were not among the isolates, 25.6% of the genera picked up by cultivation were not detected by pyrosequencing. To allow comparison between both techniques, we focused on the five phyla (Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes and Deinococcus-Thermus) recovered by heterotrophic cultivation. Four of these phyla were among the most abundantly recovered by pyrosequencing. Strikingly, there was relatively little overlap between cultivation and the forward and reverse pyrosequencing-based datasets at the genus (17.1–22.2%) and OTU (3.5–3.6%) level (defined on a 97% similarity cut-off level). Comparison of the V1–V2 and V3–V2 datasets of the 16S rRNA gene revealed remarkable differences in number of OTUs and genera recovered. The forward dataset missed 33% of the genera from the reverse dataset despite comprising 50% more OTUs, while the reverse dataset did not contain 40% of the genera of the forward dataset. Similar observations were evident when comparing the forward and reverse cultivation datasets. Our results indicate that the region under consideration can have a large impact on perceived diversity, and should be considered when comparing different datasets. Finally, a high number of OTUs could not be classified using the RDP reference database, suggesting the presence of a large amount of novel diversity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4041716
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40417162014-06-09 Bacterial Diversity Assessment in Antarctic Terrestrial and Aquatic Microbial Mats: A Comparison between Bidirectional Pyrosequencing and Cultivation Tytgat, Bjorn Verleyen, Elie Obbels, Dagmar Peeters, Karolien De Wever, Aaike D’hondt, Sofie De Meyer, Tim Van Criekinge, Wim Vyverman, Wim Willems, Anne PLoS One Research Article The application of high-throughput sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene has increased the size of microbial diversity datasets by several orders of magnitude, providing improved access to the rare biosphere compared with cultivation-based approaches and more established cultivation-independent techniques. By contrast, cultivation-based approaches allow the retrieval of both common and uncommon bacteria that can grow in the conditions used and provide access to strains for biotechnological applications. We performed bidirectional pyrosequencing of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene diversity in two terrestrial and seven aquatic Antarctic microbial mat samples previously studied by heterotrophic cultivation. While, not unexpectedly, 77.5% of genera recovered by pyrosequencing were not among the isolates, 25.6% of the genera picked up by cultivation were not detected by pyrosequencing. To allow comparison between both techniques, we focused on the five phyla (Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes and Deinococcus-Thermus) recovered by heterotrophic cultivation. Four of these phyla were among the most abundantly recovered by pyrosequencing. Strikingly, there was relatively little overlap between cultivation and the forward and reverse pyrosequencing-based datasets at the genus (17.1–22.2%) and OTU (3.5–3.6%) level (defined on a 97% similarity cut-off level). Comparison of the V1–V2 and V3–V2 datasets of the 16S rRNA gene revealed remarkable differences in number of OTUs and genera recovered. The forward dataset missed 33% of the genera from the reverse dataset despite comprising 50% more OTUs, while the reverse dataset did not contain 40% of the genera of the forward dataset. Similar observations were evident when comparing the forward and reverse cultivation datasets. Our results indicate that the region under consideration can have a large impact on perceived diversity, and should be considered when comparing different datasets. Finally, a high number of OTUs could not be classified using the RDP reference database, suggesting the presence of a large amount of novel diversity. Public Library of Science 2014-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4041716/ /pubmed/24887330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0097564 Text en © 2014 Tytgat et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Tytgat, Bjorn
Verleyen, Elie
Obbels, Dagmar
Peeters, Karolien
De Wever, Aaike
D’hondt, Sofie
De Meyer, Tim
Van Criekinge, Wim
Vyverman, Wim
Willems, Anne
Bacterial Diversity Assessment in Antarctic Terrestrial and Aquatic Microbial Mats: A Comparison between Bidirectional Pyrosequencing and Cultivation
title Bacterial Diversity Assessment in Antarctic Terrestrial and Aquatic Microbial Mats: A Comparison between Bidirectional Pyrosequencing and Cultivation
title_full Bacterial Diversity Assessment in Antarctic Terrestrial and Aquatic Microbial Mats: A Comparison between Bidirectional Pyrosequencing and Cultivation
title_fullStr Bacterial Diversity Assessment in Antarctic Terrestrial and Aquatic Microbial Mats: A Comparison between Bidirectional Pyrosequencing and Cultivation
title_full_unstemmed Bacterial Diversity Assessment in Antarctic Terrestrial and Aquatic Microbial Mats: A Comparison between Bidirectional Pyrosequencing and Cultivation
title_short Bacterial Diversity Assessment in Antarctic Terrestrial and Aquatic Microbial Mats: A Comparison between Bidirectional Pyrosequencing and Cultivation
title_sort bacterial diversity assessment in antarctic terrestrial and aquatic microbial mats: a comparison between bidirectional pyrosequencing and cultivation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4041716/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24887330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0097564
work_keys_str_mv AT tytgatbjorn bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT verleyenelie bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT obbelsdagmar bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT peeterskarolien bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT deweveraaike bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT dhondtsofie bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT demeyertim bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT vancriekingewim bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT vyvermanwim bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation
AT willemsanne bacterialdiversityassessmentinantarcticterrestrialandaquaticmicrobialmatsacomparisonbetweenbidirectionalpyrosequencingandcultivation