The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies

The development and continuous improvement of high-throughput sequencing platforms have stimulated interest in the study of complex microbial communities. Currently, the most popular sequencing approach to study microbial community composition and dynamics is targeted 16S rRNA gene metabarcoding. To...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pollock, Jolinda, Glendinning, Laura, Wisedchanwet, Trong, Watson, Mick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society for Microbiology 2018
Materias:
Minireview
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5861821/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29427429
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02627-17
_version_ 1783308147783368704
author Pollock, Jolinda
Glendinning, Laura
Wisedchanwet, Trong
Watson, Mick
author_facet Pollock, Jolinda
Glendinning, Laura
Wisedchanwet, Trong
Watson, Mick
author_sort Pollock, Jolinda
collection PubMed
description The development and continuous improvement of high-throughput sequencing platforms have stimulated interest in the study of complex microbial communities. Currently, the most popular sequencing approach to study microbial community composition and dynamics is targeted 16S rRNA gene metabarcoding. To prepare samples for sequencing, there are a variety of processing steps, each with the potential to introduce bias at the data analysis stage. In this short review, key information from the literature pertaining to each processing step is described, and consequently, general recommendations for future 16S rRNA gene metabarcoding experiments are made.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5861821
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher American Society for Microbiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58618212018-04-06 The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies Pollock, Jolinda Glendinning, Laura Wisedchanwet, Trong Watson, Mick Appl Environ Microbiol Minireview The development and continuous improvement of high-throughput sequencing platforms have stimulated interest in the study of complex microbial communities. Currently, the most popular sequencing approach to study microbial community composition and dynamics is targeted 16S rRNA gene metabarcoding. To prepare samples for sequencing, there are a variety of processing steps, each with the potential to introduce bias at the data analysis stage. In this short review, key information from the literature pertaining to each processing step is described, and consequently, general recommendations for future 16S rRNA gene metabarcoding experiments are made. American Society for Microbiology 2018-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5861821/ /pubmed/29427429 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02627-17 Text en Copyright © 2018 Pollock et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Minireview
Pollock, Jolinda
Glendinning, Laura
Wisedchanwet, Trong
Watson, Mick
The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies
title The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies
title_full The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies
title_fullStr The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies
title_full_unstemmed The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies
title_short The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies
title_sort madness of microbiome: attempting to find consensus “best practice” for 16s microbiome studies
topic Minireview
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5861821/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29427429
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02627-17
work_keys_str_mv AT pollockjolinda themadnessofmicrobiomeattemptingtofindconsensusbestpracticefor16smicrobiomestudies
AT glendinninglaura themadnessofmicrobiomeattemptingtofindconsensusbestpracticefor16smicrobiomestudies
AT wisedchanwettrong themadnessofmicrobiomeattemptingtofindconsensusbestpracticefor16smicrobiomestudies
AT watsonmick themadnessofmicrobiomeattemptingtofindconsensusbestpracticefor16smicrobiomestudies
AT pollockjolinda madnessofmicrobiomeattemptingtofindconsensusbestpracticefor16smicrobiomestudies
AT glendinninglaura madnessofmicrobiomeattemptingtofindconsensusbestpracticefor16smicrobiomestudies
AT wisedchanwettrong madnessofmicrobiomeattemptingtofindconsensusbestpracticefor16smicrobiomestudies
AT watsonmick madnessofmicrobiomeattemptingtofindconsensusbestpracticefor16smicrobiomestudies

Ejemplares similares