Cargando…

Comparison of Methods To Collect Fecal Samples for Microbiome Studies Using Whole-Genome Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing

Few previous studies have assessed stability and “gold-standard” concordance of fecal sample collection methods for whole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing (WGSS), an increasingly popular method for studying the gut microbiome. We used WGSS data to investigate ambient temperature stability and p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Byrd, Doratha A., Sinha, Rashmi, Hoffman, Kristi L., Chen, Jun, Hua, Xing, Shi, Jianxin, Chia, Nicholas, Petrosino, Joseph, Vogtmann, Emily
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society for Microbiology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7045388/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32250964
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00827-19
_version_ 1783501765807702016
author Byrd, Doratha A.
Sinha, Rashmi
Hoffman, Kristi L.
Chen, Jun
Hua, Xing
Shi, Jianxin
Chia, Nicholas
Petrosino, Joseph
Vogtmann, Emily
author_facet Byrd, Doratha A.
Sinha, Rashmi
Hoffman, Kristi L.
Chen, Jun
Hua, Xing
Shi, Jianxin
Chia, Nicholas
Petrosino, Joseph
Vogtmann, Emily
author_sort Byrd, Doratha A.
collection PubMed
description Few previous studies have assessed stability and “gold-standard” concordance of fecal sample collection methods for whole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing (WGSS), an increasingly popular method for studying the gut microbiome. We used WGSS data to investigate ambient temperature stability and putative gold-standard concordance of microbial profiles in fecal samples collected and stored using fecal occult blood test (FOBT) cards, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) tubes, 95% ethanol, or RNAlater. Among 15 Mayo Clinic employees, for each collection method, we calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) to estimate stability of fecal microbial profiles after storage for 4 days at ambient temperature and concordance with immediately frozen, no-solution samples (i.e., the putative gold standard). ICCs were estimated for multiple metrics, including relative abundances of select phyla, species, KEGG k-genes (representing any coding sequence that had >70% identity and >70% query coverage with respect to a known KEGG ortholog), KEGG modules, and KEGG pathways; species and k-gene alpha diversity; and Bray-Curtis and Jaccard species beta diversity. ICCs for microbial profile stability were excellent (≥90%) for fecal samples collected via most of the collection methods, except those preserved in 95% ethanol. Concordance with the immediately frozen, no-solution samples varied for all collection methods, but the number of observed species and the beta diversity metrics tended to have higher concordance than other metrics. Our findings, taken together with previous studies and feasibility considerations, indicated that FOBT cards, FIT tubes, and RNAlater are acceptable choices for fecal sample collection methods in future WGSS studies. IMPORTANCE A major direction for future microbiome research is implementation of fecal sample collections in large-scale, prospective epidemiologic studies. Studying microbiome-disease associations likely requires microbial data to be pooled from multiple studies. Our findings suggest collection methods that are most optimal to be used standardly across future WGSS microbiome studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7045388
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher American Society for Microbiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70453882020-03-06 Comparison of Methods To Collect Fecal Samples for Microbiome Studies Using Whole-Genome Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing Byrd, Doratha A. Sinha, Rashmi Hoffman, Kristi L. Chen, Jun Hua, Xing Shi, Jianxin Chia, Nicholas Petrosino, Joseph Vogtmann, Emily mSphere Research Article Few previous studies have assessed stability and “gold-standard” concordance of fecal sample collection methods for whole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing (WGSS), an increasingly popular method for studying the gut microbiome. We used WGSS data to investigate ambient temperature stability and putative gold-standard concordance of microbial profiles in fecal samples collected and stored using fecal occult blood test (FOBT) cards, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) tubes, 95% ethanol, or RNAlater. Among 15 Mayo Clinic employees, for each collection method, we calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) to estimate stability of fecal microbial profiles after storage for 4 days at ambient temperature and concordance with immediately frozen, no-solution samples (i.e., the putative gold standard). ICCs were estimated for multiple metrics, including relative abundances of select phyla, species, KEGG k-genes (representing any coding sequence that had >70% identity and >70% query coverage with respect to a known KEGG ortholog), KEGG modules, and KEGG pathways; species and k-gene alpha diversity; and Bray-Curtis and Jaccard species beta diversity. ICCs for microbial profile stability were excellent (≥90%) for fecal samples collected via most of the collection methods, except those preserved in 95% ethanol. Concordance with the immediately frozen, no-solution samples varied for all collection methods, but the number of observed species and the beta diversity metrics tended to have higher concordance than other metrics. Our findings, taken together with previous studies and feasibility considerations, indicated that FOBT cards, FIT tubes, and RNAlater are acceptable choices for fecal sample collection methods in future WGSS studies. IMPORTANCE A major direction for future microbiome research is implementation of fecal sample collections in large-scale, prospective epidemiologic studies. Studying microbiome-disease associations likely requires microbial data to be pooled from multiple studies. Our findings suggest collection methods that are most optimal to be used standardly across future WGSS microbiome studies. American Society for Microbiology 2020-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7045388/ /pubmed/32250964 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00827-19 Text en Copyright © 2020 Byrd 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 Research Article
Byrd, Doratha A.
Sinha, Rashmi
Hoffman, Kristi L.
Chen, Jun
Hua, Xing
Shi, Jianxin
Chia, Nicholas
Petrosino, Joseph
Vogtmann, Emily
Comparison of Methods To Collect Fecal Samples for Microbiome Studies Using Whole-Genome Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing
title Comparison of Methods To Collect Fecal Samples for Microbiome Studies Using Whole-Genome Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing
title_full Comparison of Methods To Collect Fecal Samples for Microbiome Studies Using Whole-Genome Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing
title_fullStr Comparison of Methods To Collect Fecal Samples for Microbiome Studies Using Whole-Genome Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Methods To Collect Fecal Samples for Microbiome Studies Using Whole-Genome Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing
title_short Comparison of Methods To Collect Fecal Samples for Microbiome Studies Using Whole-Genome Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing
title_sort comparison of methods to collect fecal samples for microbiome studies using whole-genome shotgun metagenomic sequencing
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7045388/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32250964
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00827-19
work_keys_str_mv AT byrddorathaa comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing
AT sinharashmi comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing
AT hoffmankristil comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing
AT chenjun comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing
AT huaxing comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing
AT shijianxin comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing
AT chianicholas comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing
AT petrosinojoseph comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing
AT vogtmannemily comparisonofmethodstocollectfecalsamplesformicrobiomestudiesusingwholegenomeshotgunmetagenomicsequencing