Comparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction

Complete, accurate, cost-effective, and high-throughput reconstruction of bacterial genomes for large-scale genomic epidemiological studies is currently only possible with hybrid assembly, combining long- (typically using nanopore sequencing) and short-read (Illumina) datasets. Being able to use nan...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sanderson, N, Kapel, N, Rodger, G, Webster, H, Lipworth, S, Street, T, Peto, T, Crook, D, Stoesser, N
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: Microbiology Society 2023
_version_ 1797108478573019136
author Sanderson, N
Kapel, N
Rodger, G
Webster, H
Lipworth, S
Street, T
Peto, T
Crook, D
Stoesser, N
author_facet Sanderson, N
Kapel, N
Rodger, G
Webster, H
Lipworth, S
Street, T
Peto, T
Crook, D
Stoesser, N
author_sort Sanderson, N
collection OXFORD
description Complete, accurate, cost-effective, and high-throughput reconstruction of bacterial genomes for large-scale genomic epidemiological studies is currently only possible with hybrid assembly, combining long- (typically using nanopore sequencing) and short-read (Illumina) datasets. Being able to use nanopore-only data would be a significant advance. Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) have recently released a new flowcell (R10.4) and chemistry (Kit12), which reportedly generate per-read accuracies rivalling those of Illumina data. To evaluate this, we sequenced DNA extracts from four commonly studied bacterial pathogens, namely <em>Escherichia coli</em>, <em>Klebsiella pneumoniae</em>, <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</em> and <em>Staphylococcus aureus</em>, using Illumina and ONT’s R9.4.1/Kit10, R10.3/Kit12, R10.4/Kit12 flowcells/chemistries. We compared raw read accuracy and assembly accuracy for each modality, considering the impact of different nanopore basecalling models, commonly used assemblers, sequencing depth, and the use of duplex versus simplex reads. ‘Super accuracy’ (sup) basecalled R10.4 reads - in particular duplex reads - have high per-read accuracies and could be used to robustly reconstruct bacterial genomes without the use of Illumina data. However, the per-run yield of duplex reads generated in our hands with standard sequencing protocols was low (typically <10 %), with substantial implications for cost and throughput if relying on nanopore data only to enable bacterial genome reconstruction. In addition, recovery of small plasmids with the best-performing long-read assembler (Flye) was inconsistent. R10.4/Kit12 combined with sup basecalling holds promise as a singular sequencing technology in the reconstruction of commonly studied bacterial genomes, but hybrid assembly (Illumina+R9.4.1 hac) currently remains the highest throughput, most robust, and cost-effective approach to fully reconstruct these bacterial genomes.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T07:29:50Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:0ffe56a1-31fb-48a1-8dc9-e42e35e9b851
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T07:29:50Z
publishDate 2023
publisher Microbiology Society
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:0ffe56a1-31fb-48a1-8dc9-e42e35e9b8512023-01-16T12:02:49ZComparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstructionJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:0ffe56a1-31fb-48a1-8dc9-e42e35e9b851EnglishSymplectic ElementsMicrobiology Society2023Sanderson, NKapel, NRodger, GWebster, HLipworth, SStreet, TPeto, TCrook, DStoesser, NComplete, accurate, cost-effective, and high-throughput reconstruction of bacterial genomes for large-scale genomic epidemiological studies is currently only possible with hybrid assembly, combining long- (typically using nanopore sequencing) and short-read (Illumina) datasets. Being able to use nanopore-only data would be a significant advance. Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) have recently released a new flowcell (R10.4) and chemistry (Kit12), which reportedly generate per-read accuracies rivalling those of Illumina data. To evaluate this, we sequenced DNA extracts from four commonly studied bacterial pathogens, namely <em>Escherichia coli</em>, <em>Klebsiella pneumoniae</em>, <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</em> and <em>Staphylococcus aureus</em>, using Illumina and ONT’s R9.4.1/Kit10, R10.3/Kit12, R10.4/Kit12 flowcells/chemistries. We compared raw read accuracy and assembly accuracy for each modality, considering the impact of different nanopore basecalling models, commonly used assemblers, sequencing depth, and the use of duplex versus simplex reads. ‘Super accuracy’ (sup) basecalled R10.4 reads - in particular duplex reads - have high per-read accuracies and could be used to robustly reconstruct bacterial genomes without the use of Illumina data. However, the per-run yield of duplex reads generated in our hands with standard sequencing protocols was low (typically <10 %), with substantial implications for cost and throughput if relying on nanopore data only to enable bacterial genome reconstruction. In addition, recovery of small plasmids with the best-performing long-read assembler (Flye) was inconsistent. R10.4/Kit12 combined with sup basecalling holds promise as a singular sequencing technology in the reconstruction of commonly studied bacterial genomes, but hybrid assembly (Illumina+R9.4.1 hac) currently remains the highest throughput, most robust, and cost-effective approach to fully reconstruct these bacterial genomes.
spellingShingle Sanderson, N
Kapel, N
Rodger, G
Webster, H
Lipworth, S
Street, T
Peto, T
Crook, D
Stoesser, N
Comparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction
title Comparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction
title_full Comparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction
title_fullStr Comparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction
title_short Comparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction
title_sort comparison of r9 4 1 kit10 and r10 kit12 oxford nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction
work_keys_str_mv AT sandersonn comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction
AT kapeln comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction
AT rodgerg comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction
AT websterh comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction
AT lipworths comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction
AT streett comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction
AT petot comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction
AT crookd comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction
AT stoessern comparisonofr941kit10andr10kit12oxfordnanoporeflowcellsandchemistriesinbacterialgenomereconstruction