Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, East Boothbay, Maine, 04544, USA.
Microbiome. 2024 Jul 15;12(1):126. doi: 10.1186/s40168-024-01848-3.
Single 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.
We 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.
Our 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. Video Abstract.
单扩增基因组 (SAG) 和宏基因组组装基因组 (MAG) 是关于未培养微生物谱系编码潜力的主要信息来源,但它们的优势和局限性仍了解甚少。在这里,我们对从相同的全球环境中获得的两个先前发表的数千个 SAG 和 MAG 集合进行了直接比较。
与 MAG 相比,我们发现 SAG 不易发生嵌合现象,并且更准确地反映了栖息在热带和亚热带海洋表水层的微生物谱系的相对丰度和泛基因组内容。与 MAG 相比,SAG 也更适合将基因组信息与通过 16S rRNA 扩增子分析发现的分类群联系起来。同时,MAG 具有更容易恢复稀有谱系基因组的优势。
我们的分析揭示了环境微生物学中最常用的两种基因组回收方法的相对优势和劣势。在设计研究和解释涉及 SAG 或 MAG 的数据时,应考虑这些因素以及对基因组质量评估工具的需求。视频摘要。