ArticleBMC microbiology2025
The evaluation of shotgun sequencing and rpoB metabarcoding for taxonomic profiling of bacterial communities.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe importance of microbial community profiling has been increasingly recognized in biological and environmental research. While metabarcoding has been widely used for such analysis by targeting specific DNA sequences as markers, shotgun sequencing has been proposed as an alternative method because the analysis of whole genomes can potentially reduce biases introduced by targeted approaches. However, it is largely unknown whether shotgun sequencing may provide improved precision for qualitative taxonomic identification and quantitative abundance estimation compared with metabarcoding with housekeeping gene markers, such as the rpoB gene. Furthermore, the comparative performance of various bioinformatics pipelines for shotgun data analysis remains uncertain. In this study, we evaluated the performance of rpoB metabarcoding and shotgun sequencing coupled to various bioinformatic pipelines to describe the bacterial diversity of artificially generated mock bacterial communities, which included eukaryote gDNA intentional contamination or whole-genome amplification. For shotgun sequencing, the Assembly-Binning-Method and k-mer-based approaches were evaluated.
resultsFor taxonomic profiling, the Assembly-Binning-Method and rpoB metabarcoding exhibited comparable sensitivity and precision, whereas k-mer approaches produced a notably high number of false negatives. In some cases, the Assembly-Binning-Method improved taxonomic resolution compared with rpoB metabarcoding by identifying taxa at the species level rather than the genus level. Regarding the quantification of microbial composition, the Assembly-Binning-Method consistently showed a higher correlation with expected values and a lower dissimilarity index than rpoB metabarcoding. The use of three sets of reference genomes to calculate depth coverage did not systematically affect the precision of the Assembly-Binning-Method.
conclusionsThese results demonstrate that although shotgun sequencing and rpoB metabarcoding have nearly equivalent accuracy in taxonomic profiling, shotgun sequencing has better taxonomic resolution and outperforms rpoB metabarcoding in quantitative estimation of microbial community abundance using the Assembly-Binning approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.