Benchmarking Long-Read Assemblers for Genomic Analyses of Bacterial Pathogens Using Oxford Nanopore Sequencing.

Abstract

Oxford Nanopore sequencing can be used to achieve complete bacterial genomes. However, the error rates of Oxford Nanopore long reads are greater compared to Illumina short reads. Long-read assemblers using a variety of assembly algorithms have been developed to overcome this deficiency, which have not been benchmarked for genomic analyses of bacterial pathogens using Oxford Nanopore long reads. In this study, long-read assemblers, namely Canu, Flye, Miniasm/Racon, Raven, Redbean, and Shasta, were thus benchmarked using Oxford Nanopore long reads of bacterial pathogens. Ten species were tested for mediocre- and low-quality simulated reads, and 10 species were tested for real reads. Raven was the most robust assembler, obtaining complete and accurate genomes. All Miniasm/Racon and Raven assemblies of mediocre-quality reads provided accurate antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profiles, while the Raven assembly of Klebsiella variicola with low-quality reads was the only assembly with an accurate AMR profile among all assemblers and species. All assemblers functioned well for predicting virulence genes using mediocre-quality and real reads, whereas only the Raven assemblies of low-quality reads had accurate numbers of virulence genes. Regarding multilocus sequence typing (MLST), Miniasm/Racon was the most effective assembler for mediocre-quality reads, while only the Raven assemblies of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and K. variicola with low-quality reads showed positive MLST results. Miniasm/Racon and Raven were the best performers for MLST using real reads. The Miniasm/Racon and Raven assemblies showed accurate phylogenetic inference. For the pan-genome analyses, Raven was the strongest assembler for simulated reads, whereas Miniasm/Racon and Raven performed the best for real reads. Overall, the most robust and accurate assembler was Raven, closely followed by Miniasm/Racon.