↓ Skip to main content

Testing the Limits of 454 Pyrotag Sequencing: Reproducibility, Quantitative Assessment and Comparison to T-RFLP Fingerprinting of Aquifer Microbes

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
131 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
219 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Testing the Limits of 454 Pyrotag Sequencing: Reproducibility, Quantitative Assessment and Comparison to T-RFLP Fingerprinting of Aquifer Microbes
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0040467
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giovanni Pilloni, Michael S. Granitsiotis, Marion Engel, Tillmann Lueders

Abstract

The characterization of microbial community structure via 16S rRNA gene profiling has been greatly advanced in recent years by the introduction of amplicon pyrosequencing. The possibility of barcoding gives the opportunity to massively screen multiple samples from environmental or clinical sources for community details. However, an on-going debate questions the reproducibility and semi-quantitative rigour of pyrotag sequencing, similar to the early days of community fingerprinting. In this study we demonstrate the reproducibility of bacterial 454 pyrotag sequencing over biological and technical replicates of aquifer sediment bacterial communities. Moreover, we explore the potential of recovering specific template ratios via quantitatively defined template spiking to environmental DNA. We sequenced pyrotag libraries of triplicate sediment samples taken in annual sampling campaigns at a tar oil contaminated aquifer in Düsseldorf, Germany. The abundance of dominating lineages was highly reproducible with a maximal standard deviation of ~4% read abundance across biological, and ~2% across technical replicates. Our workflow also allows for the linking of read abundances within defined assembled pyrotag contigs to that of specific 'in vivo' fingerprinting signatures. Thus we demonstrate that both terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP) analysis and pyrotag sequencing are capable of recovering highly comparable community structure. Overall diversity was roughly double in amplicon sequencing. Pyrotag libraries were also capable of linearly recovering increasing ratios (up to 20%) of 16S rRNA gene amendments from a pure culture of Aliivibrio fisheri spiked to sediment DNA. Our study demonstrates that 454 pyrotag sequencing is a robust and reproducible method, capable of reliably recovering template abundances and overall community structure within natural microbial communities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 5 2%
United States 5 2%
Spain 4 2%
France 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 6 3%
Unknown 191 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 68 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 62 28%
Student > Master 18 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 5%
Student > Bachelor 9 4%
Other 32 15%
Unknown 19 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 113 52%
Environmental Science 32 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 4%
Other 15 7%
Unknown 26 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2017.
All research outputs
#3,423,318
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#44,163
of 225,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,993
of 181,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#676
of 3,974 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,486 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 181,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,974 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.