A comparison of Oxford nanopore library strategies for bacterial genomics

Background Oxford nanopore Technologies (ONT) provides three main library preparation strategies to sequence bacterial genomes. These include tagmentation (TAG), ligation (LIG) and amplification (PCR). Despite ONT’s recommendations, making an informed decision for preparation choice remains difficult without a side-by-side comparison. Here, we sequenced 12 bacterial strains to examine the overall output of these strategies, including sequencing noise, barcoding efficiency and assembly quality based on mapping to curated genomes established herein. Results Average read length ranged closely for TAG and LIG (> 5,000 bp), while being drastically smaller for PCR (< 1,100 bp). LIG produced the largest output with 33.62 Gbp vs. 11.72 Gbp for TAG and 4.79 Gbp for PCR. PCR produced the most sequencing noise with only 22.7% of reads mappable to the curated genomes, vs. 92.9% for LIG and 87.3% for TAG. Output per channel was most homogenous in LIG and most variable in PCR, while intermediate in TAG. Artifactual tandem content was most abundant in PCR (22.5%) and least in LIG and TAG (0.9% and 2.2%). Basecalling and demultiplexing of barcoded libraries resulted in ~ 20% data loss as unclassified reads and 1.5% read leakage. Conclusion The output of LIG was best (low noise, high read numbers of long lengths), intermediate in TAG (some noise, moderate read numbers of long lengths) and less desirable in PCR (high noise, high read numbers of short lengths). Overall, users should not accept assembly results at face value without careful replicon verification, including the detection of plasmids assembled from leaked reads.

Keyword(s)

Hybrid, Native, Leakage, Ligation, Mapping, minION, Tagmentation, Tandem, Transposase, Replicons

Full Text

FilePagesSizeAccess
Publisher's official version
162 Mo
Additional file 1. Preparation kits.
1423 Ko
Additional file 2. Fail vs. Pass reads.
2651 Ko
Additional file 3. Assembly details and chromosome attributes.
4584 Ko
Additional file 4. Barcoding statistics.
5605 Ko
Additional file 5. DNA extraction protocol.
1415 Ko
How to cite
Sauvage Thomas, Cormier Alexandre, Passerini Delphine (2023). A comparison of Oxford nanopore library strategies for bacterial genomics. Bmc Genomics. 24 (1). 627 (16p.). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-023-09729-z, https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00857/96917/

Copy this text