Home › Studies › PRJNA308846
PRJNA308846 SRP068612

Sequencing technology comparison on elderly stool samples

Human Faecal Samples Raw sequence reads

Cross-sectional study comparing amplicon and shotgun sequencing methods (Illumina HiSeq, MiSeq, Ion PGM) using 6 stool samples from elderly individuals; no disease condition or intervention specified. machine-written summary

6 samples · 18 runs · Age unknown · 2016 · 5.74 Gbp / sample

Sources
○Sequence archive○Abstract / description✓Full text 6○Supplementary tables–External resources–User contribution–Human verified

Checked this project's papers and archive records yourself? Mark it human-verified.

what each source gave
○ Sequence archiverecords read; no usable sample values
○ Abstract / descriptionread; no usable statement
✓ Full text6 sample values (subject id) · PMC4746063
○ Supplementary tablesfiles read; no table could be matched to the samples
– External resourcesnot covered by the external resources we ingest
– User contributionnothing uploaded yet
– Human verifiednot yet checked by a person · I checked this project — verify it
Samples at a glance
Age
elderly6
Body site
primary6
Sequencing depth per sample · this project all projects
all projects, 0–0.03 Gbp: 25,080 samples (4 %)all projects, 0.03–0.1 Gbp: 17,066 samples (3 %)all projects, 0.1–0.3 Gbp: 29,179 samples (5 %)all projects, 0.3–1 Gbp: 47,044 samples (8 %)all projects, 1–3 Gbp: 124,983 samples (22 %)all projects, 3–10 Gbp: 253,728 samples (44 %)this project, 3–10 Gbp: 6 samplesall projects, 10–30 Gbp: 72,533 samples (13 %)all projects, 30–100 Gbp: 3,024 samples (1 %)all projects, 100–300 Gbp: 106 samples (0 %)all projects, ≥ 300 Gbp: 9 samples (0 %)project median 5.74 Gbp per sample0130Gbp
Community composition
Phocaeicola 18.3%Bacteroides 14.8%Alistipes 7.8%Parabacteroides 4.8%Roseburia 3.2%Barnesiella 2.0%Bovifimicola 1.9%Eshraghiella 1.8%Klebsiella 1.6%Ruminiclostridium_E 1.6%Lachnospira 1.5%Sutterella 1.5%not assigned to a genus 6.1%other genera 33.0%

Genera, mean relative abundance over 5 profiled gut samples of this project (Sandpiper SingleM profiles, GTDB R232; low-depth and non-metagenome profiles left out).

Field coverage
fieldsamplescoverageR1R2R3R4
age_category6 100%
country0 0%
health_condition0 0%
subject_id6 100%6
Papers (1)
  • Comparing Apples and Oranges?: Next Generation Sequencing and Its Impact on Microbiome Analysis. 2016 PMID 26849217 PMC4746063 own_data
Details
Archive description

The goals of this study were to compare sequencing technology results and investigate their 16S rRNA gene and Metagenomic sequencing ability.

How this project entered the registry

Classified as human gut / stool shotgun DNA metagenome of age unknown by opus_adjudicated with confidence 0.50. Assay shotgun_dna.

  • host run.host_tax_id · “9606”
  • host study.title · “Human Faecal Samples”
  • body site study.title · “Human Faecal Samples”
Evidence examples (one per field × route)
samplefieldvaluerouteconf.sourcequote
SAMN04414075subject_idSAMN04414075R30.70design.one_sample_per_subject:fulltextStool samples were collected from six elderly individuals
Sequencing

18 runs over 6 samples · mean 1.91 Gbp per run (median 0.73 Gbp, total 34.40 Gbp; 18 runs with a base count) · layout PAIRED 12, SINGLE 6 · platform ILLUMINA 12, ION_TORRENT 6 · models Illumina HiSeq 2000 (6), Illumina MiSeq (6), Ion Torrent PGM (6) · 39% of runs with a Sandpiper profile · first public 2016-02-16

Authors (7)

Clooney AG first · Fouhy F · Sleator RD · O' Driscoll A · Stanton C · Cotter PD · Claesson MJ last

Downloads

PRJNA308846.csv.gz (997 B) · parquet (68.5 KB) — all 6 samples, every field with route and confidence · PRJNA308846_determinations.csv.gz (447 B) — 6 evidence rows

Samples (6 · every field this project has values for · hover a cell for its source)
Loading the sample table…