Cargando…

A Comparison of Homogenization vs. Enzymatic Lysis for Microbiome Profiling in Clinical Endoscopic Biopsy Tissue Samples

Identification of the human microbiome has proven to be of utmost importance with the emerging role of bacteria in various physiological and pathological processes. High throughput sequencing strategies have evolved to assess the composition of the microbiome. To identify possible bias that may exis...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Chao, Thakkar, Prashant V., Powell, Sarah Ellen, Sharma, Prateek, Vennelaganti, Sreekar, Betel, Doron, Shah, Manish A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6331478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30671046
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.03246
_version_ 1783387140018667520
author Zhang, Chao
Thakkar, Prashant V.
Powell, Sarah Ellen
Sharma, Prateek
Vennelaganti, Sreekar
Betel, Doron
Shah, Manish A.
author_facet Zhang, Chao
Thakkar, Prashant V.
Powell, Sarah Ellen
Sharma, Prateek
Vennelaganti, Sreekar
Betel, Doron
Shah, Manish A.
author_sort Zhang, Chao
collection PubMed
description Identification of the human microbiome has proven to be of utmost importance with the emerging role of bacteria in various physiological and pathological processes. High throughput sequencing strategies have evolved to assess the composition of the microbiome. To identify possible bias that may exist in the processing of tissue for whole genome sequencing (WGS), it is important to evaluate the extraction method on the overall microbial content and composition. Here we compare two different methods of extraction, homogenization vs. enzymatic lysis, on gastric, esophageal and colorectal biopsies and survey the microbial content and composition using WGS and quantitative PCR (qPCR). We examined total bacterial content using universal 16S rDNA qPCR as well as the abundance of three phyla (Actinobacter, Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes) and one genus (Fusobacterium). We found minimal differences between the two extraction methods in the overall community structure. Furthermore, based on our qPCR analysis, neither method demonstrated preferential extraction of any particular clade of bacteria, nor significantly altered the detection of Gram-positive or Gram-negative organisms. However, although the overall microbial composition remained very similar and the most prevalent bacteria could be detected effectively using either method, the precise community structure and microbial abundances between the two methods were different, primarily due to variations in detection of low abundance genus. We also demonstrate that the homogenization extraction method provides higher microbial DNA content and higher read counts from human tissue biopsy samples of the gastrointestinal tract.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6331478
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63314782019-01-22 A Comparison of Homogenization vs. Enzymatic Lysis for Microbiome Profiling in Clinical Endoscopic Biopsy Tissue Samples Zhang, Chao Thakkar, Prashant V. Powell, Sarah Ellen Sharma, Prateek Vennelaganti, Sreekar Betel, Doron Shah, Manish A. Front Microbiol Microbiology Identification of the human microbiome has proven to be of utmost importance with the emerging role of bacteria in various physiological and pathological processes. High throughput sequencing strategies have evolved to assess the composition of the microbiome. To identify possible bias that may exist in the processing of tissue for whole genome sequencing (WGS), it is important to evaluate the extraction method on the overall microbial content and composition. Here we compare two different methods of extraction, homogenization vs. enzymatic lysis, on gastric, esophageal and colorectal biopsies and survey the microbial content and composition using WGS and quantitative PCR (qPCR). We examined total bacterial content using universal 16S rDNA qPCR as well as the abundance of three phyla (Actinobacter, Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes) and one genus (Fusobacterium). We found minimal differences between the two extraction methods in the overall community structure. Furthermore, based on our qPCR analysis, neither method demonstrated preferential extraction of any particular clade of bacteria, nor significantly altered the detection of Gram-positive or Gram-negative organisms. However, although the overall microbial composition remained very similar and the most prevalent bacteria could be detected effectively using either method, the precise community structure and microbial abundances between the two methods were different, primarily due to variations in detection of low abundance genus. We also demonstrate that the homogenization extraction method provides higher microbial DNA content and higher read counts from human tissue biopsy samples of the gastrointestinal tract. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6331478/ /pubmed/30671046 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.03246 Text en Copyright © 2019 Zhang, Thakkar, Powell, Sharma, Vennelaganti, Betel and Shah. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Microbiology
Zhang, Chao
Thakkar, Prashant V.
Powell, Sarah Ellen
Sharma, Prateek
Vennelaganti, Sreekar
Betel, Doron
Shah, Manish A.
A Comparison of Homogenization vs. Enzymatic Lysis for Microbiome Profiling in Clinical Endoscopic Biopsy Tissue Samples
title A Comparison of Homogenization vs. Enzymatic Lysis for Microbiome Profiling in Clinical Endoscopic Biopsy Tissue Samples
title_full A Comparison of Homogenization vs. Enzymatic Lysis for Microbiome Profiling in Clinical Endoscopic Biopsy Tissue Samples
title_fullStr A Comparison of Homogenization vs. Enzymatic Lysis for Microbiome Profiling in Clinical Endoscopic Biopsy Tissue Samples
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Homogenization vs. Enzymatic Lysis for Microbiome Profiling in Clinical Endoscopic Biopsy Tissue Samples
title_short A Comparison of Homogenization vs. Enzymatic Lysis for Microbiome Profiling in Clinical Endoscopic Biopsy Tissue Samples
title_sort comparison of homogenization vs. enzymatic lysis for microbiome profiling in clinical endoscopic biopsy tissue samples
topic Microbiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6331478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30671046
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.03246
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangchao acomparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT thakkarprashantv acomparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT powellsarahellen acomparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT sharmaprateek acomparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT vennelagantisreekar acomparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT beteldoron acomparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT shahmanisha acomparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT zhangchao comparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT thakkarprashantv comparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT powellsarahellen comparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT sharmaprateek comparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT vennelagantisreekar comparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT beteldoron comparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples
AT shahmanisha comparisonofhomogenizationvsenzymaticlysisformicrobiomeprofilinginclinicalendoscopicbiopsytissuesamples