Cargando…

Gene-Based Pathogen Detection: Can We Use qPCR to Predict the Outcome of Diagnostic Metagenomics?

In microbial food safety, molecular methods such as quantitative PCR (qPCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS) of bacterial isolates can potentially be replaced by diagnostic shotgun metagenomics. However, the methods for pre-analytical sample preparation are often optimized for qPCR, and do not n...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Andersen, Sandra Christine, Fachmann, Mette Sofie Rousing, Kiil, Kristoffer, Møller Nielsen, Eva, Hoorfar, Jeffrey
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5704245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29156625
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes8110332
_version_ 1783281851195981824
author Andersen, Sandra Christine
Fachmann, Mette Sofie Rousing
Kiil, Kristoffer
Møller Nielsen, Eva
Hoorfar, Jeffrey
author_facet Andersen, Sandra Christine
Fachmann, Mette Sofie Rousing
Kiil, Kristoffer
Møller Nielsen, Eva
Hoorfar, Jeffrey
author_sort Andersen, Sandra Christine
collection PubMed
description In microbial food safety, molecular methods such as quantitative PCR (qPCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS) of bacterial isolates can potentially be replaced by diagnostic shotgun metagenomics. However, the methods for pre-analytical sample preparation are often optimized for qPCR, and do not necessarily perform equally well for qPCR and sequencing. The present study investigates, through screening of methods, whether qPCR can be used as an indicator for the optimization of sample preparation for NGS-based shotgun metagenomics with a diagnostic focus. This was used on human fecal samples spiked with 10(3) or 10(6) colony-forming units (CFU)/g Campylobacter jejuni, as well as porcine fecal samples spiked with 10(3) or 10(6) CFU/g Salmonella typhimurium. DNA was extracted from the samples using variations of two widely used kits. The following quality parameters were measured: DNA concentration, qPCR, DNA fragmentation during library preparation, amount of DNA available for sequencing, amount of sequencing data, distribution of data between samples in a batch, and data insert size; none showed any correlation with the target ratio of the spiking organism detected in sequencing data. Surprisingly, diagnostic metagenomics can have better detection sensitivity than qPCR for samples spiked with 10(3) CFU/g C. jejuni. The study also showed that qPCR and sequencing results may be different due to inhibition in one of the methods. In conclusion, qPCR cannot uncritically be used as an indicator for the optimization of sample preparation for diagnostic metagenomics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5704245
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57042452017-11-30 Gene-Based Pathogen Detection: Can We Use qPCR to Predict the Outcome of Diagnostic Metagenomics? Andersen, Sandra Christine Fachmann, Mette Sofie Rousing Kiil, Kristoffer Møller Nielsen, Eva Hoorfar, Jeffrey Genes (Basel) Article In microbial food safety, molecular methods such as quantitative PCR (qPCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS) of bacterial isolates can potentially be replaced by diagnostic shotgun metagenomics. However, the methods for pre-analytical sample preparation are often optimized for qPCR, and do not necessarily perform equally well for qPCR and sequencing. The present study investigates, through screening of methods, whether qPCR can be used as an indicator for the optimization of sample preparation for NGS-based shotgun metagenomics with a diagnostic focus. This was used on human fecal samples spiked with 10(3) or 10(6) colony-forming units (CFU)/g Campylobacter jejuni, as well as porcine fecal samples spiked with 10(3) or 10(6) CFU/g Salmonella typhimurium. DNA was extracted from the samples using variations of two widely used kits. The following quality parameters were measured: DNA concentration, qPCR, DNA fragmentation during library preparation, amount of DNA available for sequencing, amount of sequencing data, distribution of data between samples in a batch, and data insert size; none showed any correlation with the target ratio of the spiking organism detected in sequencing data. Surprisingly, diagnostic metagenomics can have better detection sensitivity than qPCR for samples spiked with 10(3) CFU/g C. jejuni. The study also showed that qPCR and sequencing results may be different due to inhibition in one of the methods. In conclusion, qPCR cannot uncritically be used as an indicator for the optimization of sample preparation for diagnostic metagenomics. MDPI 2017-11-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5704245/ /pubmed/29156625 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes8110332 Text en © 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Andersen, Sandra Christine
Fachmann, Mette Sofie Rousing
Kiil, Kristoffer
Møller Nielsen, Eva
Hoorfar, Jeffrey
Gene-Based Pathogen Detection: Can We Use qPCR to Predict the Outcome of Diagnostic Metagenomics?
title Gene-Based Pathogen Detection: Can We Use qPCR to Predict the Outcome of Diagnostic Metagenomics?
title_full Gene-Based Pathogen Detection: Can We Use qPCR to Predict the Outcome of Diagnostic Metagenomics?
title_fullStr Gene-Based Pathogen Detection: Can We Use qPCR to Predict the Outcome of Diagnostic Metagenomics?
title_full_unstemmed Gene-Based Pathogen Detection: Can We Use qPCR to Predict the Outcome of Diagnostic Metagenomics?
title_short Gene-Based Pathogen Detection: Can We Use qPCR to Predict the Outcome of Diagnostic Metagenomics?
title_sort gene-based pathogen detection: can we use qpcr to predict the outcome of diagnostic metagenomics?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5704245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29156625
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes8110332
work_keys_str_mv AT andersensandrachristine genebasedpathogendetectioncanweuseqpcrtopredicttheoutcomeofdiagnosticmetagenomics
AT fachmannmettesofierousing genebasedpathogendetectioncanweuseqpcrtopredicttheoutcomeofdiagnosticmetagenomics
AT kiilkristoffer genebasedpathogendetectioncanweuseqpcrtopredicttheoutcomeofdiagnosticmetagenomics
AT møllernielseneva genebasedpathogendetectioncanweuseqpcrtopredicttheoutcomeofdiagnosticmetagenomics
AT hoorfarjeffrey genebasedpathogendetectioncanweuseqpcrtopredicttheoutcomeofdiagnosticmetagenomics