Challenges in capturing the mycobiome from shotgun metagenome data: lack of software and databases.

IF 13.8 1区 生物学 Q1 MICROBIOLOGY
Ekaterina Avershina, Arfa Irej Qureshi, Hanne C Winther-Larsen, Trine B Rounge
{"title":"Challenges in capturing the mycobiome from shotgun metagenome data: lack of software and databases.","authors":"Ekaterina Avershina, Arfa Irej Qureshi, Hanne C Winther-Larsen, Trine B Rounge","doi":"10.1186/s40168-025-02048-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The mycobiome, representing the fungal component of microbial communities, is increasingly acknowledged as an integral part of the gut microbiome. However, research in this area remains relatively limited. The characterization of mycobiome taxa from metagenomic data is heavily reliant on the quality of the software and databases. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of mycobiome profiling using existing bioinformatics tools on simulated fungal metagenomic data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified seven tools claiming to perform taxonomic assignment of fungal shotgun metagenomic sequences. One of these was outdated and required substantial modifications of the code to be functional and was thus excluded. To evaluate the accuracy of identification and relative abundance of the remaining tools (Kraken2, MetaPhlAn4, EukDetect, FunOMIC, MiCoP, and HumanMycobiomeScan), we constructed 18 mock communities of varying species richness and abundance levels. The mock communities comprised up to 165 fungal species belonging to the phyla Ascomycota and Basidiomycota, commonly found in gut microbiomes. Of the tools, FunOMIC and HumanMycobiomeScan needed source code modifications to run. Notably, only one species, Candida orthopsilosis, was consistently identified by all tools across all communities where it was included. Increasing community richness improved precision of Kraken2 and the relative abundance accuracy of all tools on species, genus, and family levels. MetaPhlAn4 accurately identified all genera present in the communities and FunOMIC identified most species. The top three tools for overall accuracy in both identification and relative abundance estimation were EukDetect, MiCoP, and FunOMIC, respectively. Adding 90% and 99% bacterial background did not significantly impact these tools' performance. Among the whole genome reference tools (Kraken2, HMS, and MiCoP), MiCoP exhibited the highest accuracy when the same reference database was used.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our survey of mycobiome-specific software revealed a very limited selection of such tools and their poor robustness due to error-prone software, along with a significant lack of comprehensive databases enabling characterization of the mycobiome. None of the implemented tools fully agreed on the mock community profiles. FunOMIC recognized most of the species, but EukDetect and MiCoP provided predictions that were closest to the correct compositions. The bacterial background did not impact these tools' performance. Video Abstract.</p>","PeriodicalId":18447,"journal":{"name":"Microbiome","volume":"13 1","pages":"66"},"PeriodicalIF":13.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11887097/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microbiome","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-025-02048-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The mycobiome, representing the fungal component of microbial communities, is increasingly acknowledged as an integral part of the gut microbiome. However, research in this area remains relatively limited. The characterization of mycobiome taxa from metagenomic data is heavily reliant on the quality of the software and databases. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of mycobiome profiling using existing bioinformatics tools on simulated fungal metagenomic data.

Results: We identified seven tools claiming to perform taxonomic assignment of fungal shotgun metagenomic sequences. One of these was outdated and required substantial modifications of the code to be functional and was thus excluded. To evaluate the accuracy of identification and relative abundance of the remaining tools (Kraken2, MetaPhlAn4, EukDetect, FunOMIC, MiCoP, and HumanMycobiomeScan), we constructed 18 mock communities of varying species richness and abundance levels. The mock communities comprised up to 165 fungal species belonging to the phyla Ascomycota and Basidiomycota, commonly found in gut microbiomes. Of the tools, FunOMIC and HumanMycobiomeScan needed source code modifications to run. Notably, only one species, Candida orthopsilosis, was consistently identified by all tools across all communities where it was included. Increasing community richness improved precision of Kraken2 and the relative abundance accuracy of all tools on species, genus, and family levels. MetaPhlAn4 accurately identified all genera present in the communities and FunOMIC identified most species. The top three tools for overall accuracy in both identification and relative abundance estimation were EukDetect, MiCoP, and FunOMIC, respectively. Adding 90% and 99% bacterial background did not significantly impact these tools' performance. Among the whole genome reference tools (Kraken2, HMS, and MiCoP), MiCoP exhibited the highest accuracy when the same reference database was used.

Conclusion: Our survey of mycobiome-specific software revealed a very limited selection of such tools and their poor robustness due to error-prone software, along with a significant lack of comprehensive databases enabling characterization of the mycobiome. None of the implemented tools fully agreed on the mock community profiles. FunOMIC recognized most of the species, but EukDetect and MiCoP provided predictions that were closest to the correct compositions. The bacterial background did not impact these tools' performance. Video Abstract.

从散弹法宏基因组数据中获取真菌群落的挑战:缺乏软件和数据库。
背景:真菌组,代表微生物群落的真菌成分,越来越被认为是肠道微生物组的一个组成部分。然而,这方面的研究仍然相对有限。从宏基因组数据中对真菌群落分类群的表征在很大程度上依赖于软件和数据库的质量。在这项研究中,我们评估了利用现有生物信息学工具对模拟真菌宏基因组数据进行真菌组分析的可行性。结果:我们确定了七个工具声称执行真菌霰弹枪宏基因组序列的分类分配。其中一种已经过时,需要对代码进行大量修改才能发挥功能,因此被排除在外。为了评估鉴定的准确性和剩余工具(Kraken2、MetaPhlAn4、EukDetect、FunOMIC、MiCoP和HumanMycobiomeScan)的相对丰度,我们构建了18个不同物种丰富度和丰度水平的模拟群落。模拟群落包括多达165种属于子囊菌门和担子菌门的真菌,通常在肠道微生物组中发现。在这些工具中,FunOMIC和HumanMycobiomeScan需要修改源代码才能运行。值得注意的是,只有一个物种,念珠菌矫形silosis,在所有包括它的群落中,所有工具都一致地识别出来。群落丰富度的增加提高了Kraken2的精度和所有工具在种、属和科水平上的相对丰度精度。MetaPhlAn4能准确识别出群落中存在的所有属,FunOMIC能准确识别出大多数种。在鉴定和相对丰度估计的总体准确性方面,排名前三的工具分别是EukDetect、MiCoP和FunOMIC。添加90%和99%的细菌背景对这些工具的性能没有显著影响。在全基因组参考工具(Kraken2、HMS和MiCoP)中,MiCoP在使用相同参考数据库时表现出最高的准确性。结论:我们对真菌组特异性软件的调查显示,此类工具的选择非常有限,并且由于容易出错的软件,它们的鲁棒性很差,同时明显缺乏能够表征真菌组的全面数据库。实现的工具中没有一个完全同意模拟社区概要。FunOMIC识别了大多数物种,但EukDetect和MiCoP提供的预测最接近正确的成分。细菌背景对这些工具的性能没有影响。视频摘要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Microbiome
Microbiome MICROBIOLOGY-
CiteScore
21.90
自引率
2.60%
发文量
198
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊介绍: Microbiome is a journal that focuses on studies of microbiomes in humans, animals, plants, and the environment. It covers both natural and manipulated microbiomes, such as those in agriculture. The journal is interested in research that uses meta-omics approaches or novel bioinformatics tools and emphasizes the community/host interaction and structure-function relationship within the microbiome. Studies that go beyond descriptive omics surveys and include experimental or theoretical approaches will be considered for publication. The journal also encourages research that establishes cause and effect relationships and supports proposed microbiome functions. However, studies of individual microbial isolates/species without exploring their impact on the host or the complex microbiome structures and functions will not be considered for publication. Microbiome is indexed in BIOSIS, Current Contents, DOAJ, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, PubMed Central, and Science Citations Index Expanded.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信