The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Analysis of 16S rRNA Amplicon Sequencing Options on the Roche/454 Next-Generation Titanium Sequencing Platform
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing approach has revolutionized studies in microbial ecology. While primer selection and short read length can affect the resulting microbial community profile, little is known about the influence of pyrosequencing methods on the sequencing throughput and the outcome of microbial community analyses. The aim of this study is to compare differences in output, ease, and cost among three different amplicon pyrosequencing methods for the Roche/454 Titanium platform METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The following three pyrosequencing methods for 16S rRNA genes were selected in this study: Method-1 (standard method) is the recommended method for bi-directional sequencing using the LIB-A kit; Method-2 is a new option designed in this study for unidirectional sequencing with the LIB-A kit; and Method-3 uses the LIB-L kit for unidirectional sequencing. In our comparison among these three methods using 10 different environmental samples, Method-2 and Method-3 produced 1.5-1.6 times more useable reads than the standard method (Method-1), after quality-based trimming, and did not compromise the outcome of microbial community analyses. Specifically, Method-3 is the most cost-effective unidirectional amplicon sequencing method as it provided the most reads and required the least effort in consumables management. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings clearly demonstrated that alternative pyrosequencing methods for 16S rRNA genes could drastically affect sequencing output (e.g. number of reads before and after trimming) but have little effect on the outcomes of microbial community analysis. This finding is important for both researchers and sequencing facilities utilizing 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing for microbial ecological studies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Zheng, P., Zeng, B., Zhou, C., Liu, M., Fang, Z., Xu, X., Zeng, L., Chen, J., Fan, S., Du, X., et al. (2016) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/mp.2016.44 · Cited by 2,023
Sensitivity and correlation of hypervariable regions in 16S rRNA genes in phylogenetic analysis
Yang, B., Wang, Y., & Qian, P.-Y. (2016) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/s12859-016-0992-y · Cited by 560
The effect of 16S rRNA region choice on bacterial community metabarcoding results
Bukin, Y. S., Galachyants, Y. P., Morozov, I. V., Bukin, S. V., Zakharenko, A. S., & Zemskaya, T. I. (2019) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2019.7 · Cited by 394
Microbial imbalance in inflammatory bowel disease patients at different taxonomic levels
Alam, M. T., Amos, G. C. A., Murphy, A. R. J., Murch, S., Wellington, E. M. H., & Arasaradnam, R. P. (2020) · Gut Pathogens · doi:10.1186/s13099-019-0341-6 · Cited by 380
Sex differences in gut microbiota in patients with major depressive disorder
Chen, J.-J., Zheng, P., Liu, Y.-Y., Zhong, X.-G., Wang, H.-Y., Guo, Y.-J., & Xie, P. (2018) · Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · doi:10.2147/ndt.s159322 · Cited by 272
Metadata
- Authors
- Tamaki, H., Wright, C. L., Li, X., Lin, Q., Hwang, C., Wang, S., Thimmapuram, J., Kamagata, Y., & Liu, W.-T.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2011-09-23
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- e25263
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2162997786
- Cited by
- 259
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Analysis of 16S rRNA Amplicon Sequencing Options on the Roche/454 Next-Generation Titanium Sequencing Platform. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0025263
- The paper
- Tamaki, H., Wright, C. L., Li, X., Lin, Q., Hwang, C., Wang, S., Thimmapuram, J., Kamagata, Y., & Liu, W.-T. (2011). Analysis of 16S rRNA Amplicon Sequencing Options on the Roche/454 Next-Generation Titanium Sequencing Platform. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025263
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.