Abstract
BackgroundMetatranscriptomics has been used widely for investigation and quantification of microbial communities’ activity in response to external stimuli. By assessing the genes expressed, metatranscriptomics provides an understanding of the interactions between different major functional guilds and the environment. Here, we present a de novo assembly-based Comparative Metatranscriptomics Workflow (CoMW) implemented in a modular, reproducible structure. Metatranscriptomics typically uses short sequence reads, which can either be directly aligned to external reference databases (“assembly-free approach”) or first assembled into contigs before alignment (“assembly-based approach”). We also compare CoMW (assembly-based implementation) with an assembly-free alternative workflow, using simulated and real-world metatranscriptomes from Arctic and temperate terrestrial environments. We evaluate their accuracy in precision and recall using generic and specialized hierarchical protein databases.ResultsCoMW provided significantly fewer false-positive results, resulting in more precise identification and quantification of functional genes in metatranscriptomes. Using the comprehensive database M5nr, the assembly-based approach identified genes with only 0.6% false-positive results at thresholds ranging from inclusive to stringent compared with the assembly-free approach, which yielded up to 15% false-positive results. Using specialized databases (carbohydrate-active enzyme and nitrogen cycle), the assembly-based approach identified and quantified genes with 3–5 times fewer false-positive results. We also evaluated the impact of both approaches on real-world datasets.ConclusionsWe present an open source de novo assembly-based CoMW. Our benchmarking findings support assembling short reads into contigs before alignment to a reference database because this provides higher precision and minimizes false-positive results.
Highlights
Reviewer Comments to Author: The authors have replied sufficiently to all my comments and did change the structure and title of the manuscript as suggested by the reviewers
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons CC-BY license
Summary
Reviewer Comments to Author: The authors have replied sufficiently to all my comments and did change the structure and title of the manuscript as suggested by the reviewers. They made the data and code available via public repositories. Please indicate how interesting you found the manuscript: Choose an item. Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript: Choose an item.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.