MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138527737 · doi:10.1186/s13104-015-1170-4

Optimizing a PCR protocol for cpn60-based microbiome profiling of samples variously contaminated with host genomic DNA

2015· article· en· W2138527737 on OpenAlex
Lisa A. Johnson, Bonnie Chaban, John C. S. Harding, Janet E. Hill

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Research Notes · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYersinia bacterium, plague, ectoparasites research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPyrosequencingMicrobiomeBiologyComputational biologygenomic DNAPolymerase chain reactionGeneticsDNAGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The current recommended protocol for chaperonin-60 (cpn60) universal target based microbiome profiling includes universal PCR of microbiome samples across an annealing temperature gradient to maximize the diversity of sequences amplified. However, the value of including this gradient approach has not been formally evaluated since the optimization of a modified universal PCR primer cocktail for cpn60 PCR. PCR conditions that maximize representation of the microbiome while minimizing PCR-associated distortion of the community structure, especially in samples containing large amounts of host genomic DNA are critical. The goal of this study was to measure the effects of PCR annealing temperature and the ratio of host to bacterial DNA on the outcome of microbiota analysis, using pig microbiota as a model environment. FINDINGS: Six samples were chosen with an anticipated range of ratios of pig to bacterial genomic DNA, and universal cpn60 PCR amplification with an annealing temperature gradient was used to create libraries for pyrosequencing, resulting in 426,477 sequences from the six samples. The sequences obtained were classified as target (cpn60) or non-target based on the percent identity of their closest match to the cpnDB reference database, and target sequences were further processed to create microbiome profiles for each sample at each annealing temperature. Annealing temperature affected the amount of PCR product generated, with more product generated at higher temperatures. Samples containing proportionally more host genomic DNA yielded more non-target reads, especially at lower annealing temperatures. However, microbiome composition for each sample across the annealing temperature gradient remained consistent at both the phylum and operational taxonomic unit levels. Although some microbial sequences were detected at only one annealing temperature, these sequences accounted for a minority of the total microbiome. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that PCR annealing temperature does have an affect on cpn60 based microbiome profiles, but that most of the differences are due to differences in detection of low abundance sequences. Higher annealing temperatures resulted in larger amounts of PCR product and lower amounts of non-target sequence amplification, especially in samples containing proportionally large amounts of host DNA. Taken together these results provide important information to guide decisions about experimental design for cpn60 based microbiome studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.189
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it