Abstract
BackgroundSingle amplified genomes (SAGs) and metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) are the predominant sources of information about the coding potential of uncultured microbial lineages, but their strengths and limitations remain poorly understood. Here, we performed a direct comparison of two previously published collections of thousands of SAGs and MAGs obtained from the same, global environment.ResultsWe found that SAGs were less prone to chimerism and more accurately reflected the relative abundance and the pangenome content of microbial lineages inhabiting the epipelagic of the tropical and subtropical ocean, as compared to MAGs. SAGs were also better suited to link genome information with taxa discovered through 16S rRNA amplicon analyses. Meanwhile, MAGs had the advantage of more readily recovering genomes of rare lineages.ConclusionsOur analyses revealed the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two most commonly used genome recovery approaches in environmental microbiology. These considerations, as well as the need for better tools for genome quality assessment, should be taken into account when designing studies and interpreting data that involve SAGs or MAGs.A1oHXULkGPU_ztj4sy3hbdVideo
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have