CowPI: A Rumen Microbiome Focussed Version of the PICRUSt Functional Inference Software

Metataxonomic 16S rDNA based studies are a commonplace and useful tool in the research of the microbiome, but they do not provide the full investigative power of metagenomics and metatranscriptomics for revealing the functional potential of microbial communities. However, the use of metagenomic and metatranscriptomic technologies is hindered by high costs and skills barrier necessary to generate and interpret the data. To address this, a tool for Phylogenetic Investigation of Communities by Reconstruction of Unobserved States (PICRUSt) was developed for inferring the functional potential of an observed microbiome profile, based on 16S data. This allows functional inferences to be made from metataxonomic 16S rDNA studies with little extra work or cost, but its accuracy relies on the availability of completely sequenced genomes of representative organisms from the community being investigated. The rumen microbiome is an example of a community traditionally underrepresented in genome and sequence databases, but recent efforts by projects such as the Global Rumen Census and Hungate 1000 have resulted in a wide sampling of 16S rDNA profiles and almost 500 fully sequenced microbial genomes from this environment. Using this information, we have developed “CowPI,” a focused version of the PICRUSt tool provided for use by the wider scientific community in the study of the rumen microbiome. We evaluated the accuracy of CowPI and PICRUSt using two 16S datasets from the rumen microbiome: one generated from rDNA and the other from rRNA where corresponding metagenomic and metatranscriptomic data was also available. We show that the functional profiles predicted by CowPI better match estimates for both the meta-genomic and transcriptomic datasets than PICRUSt, and capture the higher degree of genetic variation and larger pangenomes of rumen organisms. Nonetheless, whilst being closer in terms of predictive power for the rumen microbiome, there were differences when compared to both the metagenomic and metatranscriptome data and so we recommend, where possible, functional inferences from 16S data should not replace metagenomic and metatranscriptomic approaches. The tool can be accessed at http://www.cowpi.org and is provided to the wider scientific community for use in the study of the rumen microbiome.

[1]  S. Tringe,et al.  A genomic perspective on stoichiometric regulation of soil carbon cycling , 2017, The ISME Journal.

[2]  Qing-Yu He,et al.  DOSE: an R/Bioconductor package for disease ontology semantic and enrichment analysis , 2015, Bioinform..

[3]  William A. Walters,et al.  QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data , 2010, Nature Methods.

[4]  Y. Kuzyakov,et al.  Soil microorganisms can overcome respiration inhibition by coupling intra- and extracellular metabolism: 13C metabolic tracing reveals the mechanisms , 2017, The ISME Journal.

[5]  J. Edwards,et al.  Temporal dynamics of the metabolically active rumen bacteria colonizing fresh perennial ryegrass. , 2016, FEMS microbiology ecology.

[6]  R. Mackie.  Mutualistic Fermentative Digestion in the Gastrointestinal Tract: Diversity and Evolution1 , 2002, Integrative and comparative biology.

[7]  T. Davies,et al.  Leaf development in Lolium temulentum: Gradients of RNA complement and plastid and non-plastid transcripts , 1990 .

[8]  G. Wong,et al.  Characterization of the Gut Microbiome Using 16S or Shotgun Metagenomics , 2016, Front. Microbiol..

[9]  Alan McNally,et al.  Why prokaryotes have pangenomes , 2017, Nature Microbiology.

[10]  P. Myer,et al.  Rumen Microbiome from Steers Differing in Feed Efficiency , 2015, PloS one.

[11]  M. Theodorou,et al.  Temporal Metagenomic and Metabolomic Characterization of Fresh Perennial Ryegrass Degradation by Rumen Bacteria , 2016, Front. Microbiol..

[12]  Robert G. Beiko,et al.  STAMP: statistical analysis of taxonomic and functional profiles , 2014, Bioinform..

[13]  D. Morgavi,et al.  The Structural and Functional Capacity of Ruminal and Cecal Microbiota in Growing Cattle Was Unaffected by Dietary Supplementation of Linseed Oil and Nitrate , 2017, Front. Microbiol..

[14]  W. Huber,et al.  Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2 , 2014, Genome Biology.

[15]  B. Ao.  The vocabulary , 2020, Nantong Chinese.

[16]  Jacques Ravel,et al.  The vocabulary of microbiome research: a proposal , 2015, Microbiome.

[17]  J. Edwards,et al.  Plant-based strategies towards minimising ‘livestock's long shadow’ , 2010, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society.

[18]  S. Tringe,et al.  Temporal dynamics of fibrolytic and methanogenic rumen microorganisms during in situ incubation of switchgrass determined by 16S rRNA gene profiling , 2014, Front. Microbiol..

[19]  Jesse R. Zaneveld,et al.  Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences , 2013, Nature Biotechnology.

[20]  Yanan Yin,et al.  Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities in fermentative hydrogen production system using PICRUSt , 2020 .

[21]  Daniel Standage,et al.  The khmer software package: enabling efficient nucleotide sequence analysis , 2015, F1000Research.

[22]  E. Rubin,et al.  Rumen metagenome and metatranscriptome analyses of low methane yield sheep reveals a Sharpea-enriched microbiome characterised by lactic acid formation and utilisation , 2016, Microbiome.

[23]  Robert C. Edgar,et al.  BIOINFORMATICS APPLICATIONS NOTE , 2001 .

[24]  E. Birney,et al.  Velvet: algorithms for de novo short read assembly using de Bruijn graphs. , 2008, Genome research.

[25]  S. Tringe,et al.  Metagenomic Discovery of Biomass-Degrading Genes and Genomes from Cow Rumen , 2011, Science.

[26]  Randle Aaron M. Villanueva,et al.  ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (2nd ed.) , 2019, Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives.

[27]  D. Yáñez-Ruiz,et al.  Manipulating rumen microbiome and fermentation through interventions during early life: a review , 2015, Front. Microbiol..

[28]  J. Moorby,et al.  Characterization of the Microbiome along the Gastrointestinal Tract of Growing Turkeys , 2017, Front. Microbiol..

[29]  Jasmin Anderson,et al.  Research Proposal by , 2014 .

[30]  J. Edwards,et al.  Advances in microbial ecosystem concepts and their consequences for ruminant agriculture. , 2008, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[31]  Martin Hartmann,et al.  Introducing mothur: Open-Source, Platform-Independent, Community-Supported Software for Describing and Comparing Microbial Communities , 2009, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[32]  M. Steele,et al.  Development of Ruminal and Fecal Microbiomes Are Affected by Weaning But Not Weaning Strategy in Dairy Calves , 2016, Front. Microbiol..

[33]  Vincent Lombard,et al.  Cultivation and sequencing of rumen microbiome members from the Hungate1000 Collection , 2018, Nature Biotechnology.

[34]  Barbara Amon,et al.  Manure management: implications for greenhouse gas emissions , 2011 .

[35]  Guangchuang Yu,et al.  clusterProfiler: an R package for comparing biological themes among gene clusters. , 2012, Omics : a journal of integrative biology.

[36]  Steven L Salzberg,et al.  Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2 , 2012, Nature Methods.

[37]  O. Koren,et al.  Characterizing the gut (Gallus gallus) microbiota following the consumption of an iron biofortified Rwandan cream seeded carioca (Phaseolus Vulgaris L.) bean-based diet , 2017, PloS one.

[38]  J. Elser,et al.  Microbial functional genes elucidate environmental drivers of biofilm metabolism in glacier-fed streams , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[39]  Hiroyuki Ogata,et al.  KEGG: Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes , 1999, Nucleic Acids Res..

[40]  Eoin L. Brodie,et al.  Greengenes, a Chimera-Checked 16S rRNA Gene Database and Workbench Compatible with ARB , 2006, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[41]  Gemma Henderson,et al.  Determining the culturability of the rumen bacterial microbiome , 2014, Microbial biotechnology.

[42]  T. Wiele,et al.  Impact of breed on the rumen microbial community composition and methane emission of Holstein Friesian and Belgian Blue heifers , 2018 .

[43]  Robert W. Li,et al.  Characterization of the rumen microbiota of pre-ruminant calves using metagenomic tools. , 2012, Environmental microbiology.

[44]  A. Belanche,et al.  An Integrated Multi-Omics Approach Reveals the Effects of Supplementing Grass or Grass Hay with Vitamin E on the Rumen Microbiome and Its Function , 2016, Front. Microbiol..

[45]  C. Godfray,et al.  The Future of Food and Farming: Challenges and Choices for Global Sustainability , 2011 .

[46]  Hadley Wickham,et al.  ggplot2 - Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (2nd Edition) , 2017 .

[47]  Torsten Seemann,et al.  Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation , 2014, Bioinform..

[48]  Min Wang,et al.  Erratum: Rumen microbial community composition varies with diet and host, but a core microbiome is found across a wide geographical range , 2016, Scientific Reports.