MOST: a modified MLST typing tool based on short read sequencing
Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) is an effective method to describe bacterial populations. Conventionally, MLST involves Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) amplification of housekeeping genes followed by Sanger DNA sequencing. Public Health England (PHE) is in the process of replacing the conventional...
| 主要な著者: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| フォーマット: | Journal article |
| 言語: | English |
| 出版事項: |
PeerJ
2016
|
| _version_ | 1826291835114356736 |
|---|---|
| author | Tewolde, R Dallman, T Schaefer, U Sheppard, C Ashton, P Pichon, B Ellington, M Swift, C Green, J Underwood, A |
| author_facet | Tewolde, R Dallman, T Schaefer, U Sheppard, C Ashton, P Pichon, B Ellington, M Swift, C Green, J Underwood, A |
| author_sort | Tewolde, R |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) is an effective method to describe bacterial populations. Conventionally, MLST involves Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) amplification of housekeeping genes followed by Sanger DNA sequencing. Public Health England (PHE) is in the process of replacing the conventional MLST methodology with a method based on short read sequence data derived from Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS). This paper reports the comparison of the reliability of MLST results derived from WGS data, comparing mapping and assembly-based approaches to conventional methods using 323 bacterial genomes of diverse species. The sensitivity of the two WGS based methods were further investigated with 26 mixed and 29 low coverage genomic data sets from Salmonella enteridis and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Of the 323 samples, 92.9% (n = 300), 97.5% (n = 315) and 99.7% (n = 322) full MLST profiles were derived by the conventional method, assembly- and mapping-based approaches, respectively. The concordance between samples that were typed by conventional (92.9%) and both WGS methods was 100%. From the 55 mixed and low coverage genomes, 89.1% (n = 49) and 67.3% (n = 37) full MLST profiles were derived from the mapping and assembly based approaches, respectively. In conclusion, deriving MLST from WGS data is more sensitive than the conventional method. When comparing WGS based methods, the mapping based approach was the most sensitive. In addition, the mapping based approach described here derives quality metrics, which are difficult to determine quantitatively using conventional and WGS-assembly based approaches. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T03:05:26Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:b259158c-d9db-4f19-87db-e42b6a0add76 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T03:05:26Z |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publisher | PeerJ |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:b259158c-d9db-4f19-87db-e42b6a0add762022-03-27T04:11:06ZMOST: a modified MLST typing tool based on short read sequencingJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:b259158c-d9db-4f19-87db-e42b6a0add76EnglishSymplectic Elements at OxfordPeerJ2016Tewolde, RDallman, TSchaefer, USheppard, CAshton, PPichon, BEllington, MSwift, CGreen, JUnderwood, AMultilocus sequence typing (MLST) is an effective method to describe bacterial populations. Conventionally, MLST involves Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) amplification of housekeeping genes followed by Sanger DNA sequencing. Public Health England (PHE) is in the process of replacing the conventional MLST methodology with a method based on short read sequence data derived from Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS). This paper reports the comparison of the reliability of MLST results derived from WGS data, comparing mapping and assembly-based approaches to conventional methods using 323 bacterial genomes of diverse species. The sensitivity of the two WGS based methods were further investigated with 26 mixed and 29 low coverage genomic data sets from Salmonella enteridis and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Of the 323 samples, 92.9% (n = 300), 97.5% (n = 315) and 99.7% (n = 322) full MLST profiles were derived by the conventional method, assembly- and mapping-based approaches, respectively. The concordance between samples that were typed by conventional (92.9%) and both WGS methods was 100%. From the 55 mixed and low coverage genomes, 89.1% (n = 49) and 67.3% (n = 37) full MLST profiles were derived from the mapping and assembly based approaches, respectively. In conclusion, deriving MLST from WGS data is more sensitive than the conventional method. When comparing WGS based methods, the mapping based approach was the most sensitive. In addition, the mapping based approach described here derives quality metrics, which are difficult to determine quantitatively using conventional and WGS-assembly based approaches. |
| spellingShingle | Tewolde, R Dallman, T Schaefer, U Sheppard, C Ashton, P Pichon, B Ellington, M Swift, C Green, J Underwood, A MOST: a modified MLST typing tool based on short read sequencing |
| title | MOST: a modified MLST typing tool based on short read sequencing |
| title_full | MOST: a modified MLST typing tool based on short read sequencing |
| title_fullStr | MOST: a modified MLST typing tool based on short read sequencing |
| title_full_unstemmed | MOST: a modified MLST typing tool based on short read sequencing |
| title_short | MOST: a modified MLST typing tool based on short read sequencing |
| title_sort | most a modified mlst typing tool based on short read sequencing |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tewolder mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT dallmant mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT schaeferu mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT sheppardc mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT ashtonp mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT pichonb mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT ellingtonm mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT swiftc mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT greenj mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing AT underwooda mostamodifiedmlsttypingtoolbasedonshortreadsequencing |