Public health microbiology laboratories (PHLs) are on the cusp of unprecedented improvements in pathogen identification, antibiotic resistance detection, and outbreak investigation by using whole-genome sequencing (WGS). However, considerable challenges remain due to the lack of common standards. Here, we describe the validation of WGS on the Illumina platform for routine use in PHLs according to Clinical Laboratory Improvements Act (CLIA) guidelines for laboratory-developed tests (LDTs). We developed a validation panel comprising 10 Enterobacteriaceae isolates, 5 Gram-positive cocci, 5 Gram-negative nonfermenting species, 9 Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates, and 5 miscellaneous bacteria. The genome coverage range was 15.71× to 216.4× (average, 79.72×; median, 71.55×); the limit of detection (LOD) for single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) was 60×. The accuracy, reproducibility, and repeatability of base calling were >99.9%. The accuracy of phylogenetic analysis was 100%. The specificity and sensitivity inferred from multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and genome-wide SNP-based phylogenetic assays were 100%. The following objectives were accomplished: (i) the establishment of the performance specifications for WGS applications in PHLs according to CLIA guidelines, (ii) the development of quality assurance and quality control measures, (iii) the development of a reporting format for end users with or without WGS expertise, (iv) the availability of a validation set of microorganisms, and (v) the creation of a modular template for the validation of WGS processes in PHLs. The validation panel, sequencing analytics, and raw sequences could facilitate multilaboratory comparisons of WGS data. Additionally, the WGS performance specifications and modular template are adaptable for the validation of other platforms and reagent kits.

No abstract

Introduction:Recently, Salmonella enterica serovar Poona caused a multistate outbreak, with 245 out of 907 cases occurring in California. We report a comparison of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) results with whole genome sequencing (WGS) for genotyping of Salmonella Poona isolates.Methods:CA Salmonella Poona isolates, collected from July to August 2015, were genotyped by PFGE using XbaI restriction enzyme. WGS was done using Nextera XT library kit with 2x300 bp or 2x250 bp sequencing chemistry on the Illumina MiSeq Sequencer.  Reads were mapped to the de novo assembled serovar Poona draft genome (48 contigs, N50= 223,917) from the outbreak using CLCbio GW 8.0.2. The phylogenetic tree was generated based on hqSNPs calling. Genomes were annotated with CGE and PHAST online tools. In silico MLST was performed using the CGE online tool.Results:Human (14) and cucumber (2) Salmonella Poona isolates exhibited 3 possibly related PFGE patterns (JL6X01.0018 [predominant], JL6X01.0375, JL6X01.0778).  All isolates that were related by PFGE also clustered together according to the WGS. One isolate with a divergent PFGE pattern (JL6X01.0776) served as an outlier in the phylogenetic analysis and substantially differed from the outbreak clade by WGS. All outbreak isolates were assigned to MLST sequence type 447. The majority of the outbreak-related isolates possessed the same set of Salmonella Pathogenicity Islands with few variations. One outbreak isolate was sequenced and analyzed independently by CDC and CDPH laboratories; there was 0 SNP difference in results. Additional two isolates were sequenced by CDC and the raw data was processed through CDPH and CDC analysis pipelines. Both data analysis pipelines also generated concordant results. Discussion:PFGE and WGS results for the recent CA Salmonella enterica serovar Poona outbreak provided concordant assignment of the isolates to the outbreak cluster. WGS allowed more robust determination of genetic relatedness, provided information regarding MLST-type, pathogenicity genes, and bacteriophage content. WGS data obtained independently at two laboratories showed complete agreement.

No abstract

Taking the social agency of dead bodies as its main theme, this introduction discusses the articles in this special section on the bioarchaeology of post-mortem agency and discusses theoretical concerns relevant to the (bio)archaeological analysis of agency. In particular, the argument that only biological living persons have social agency or impact the direction of social processes, or the decisions of others is challenged. The challenges of defining and archaeologically detecting such agency of past humans as well as socially alive entities such as ghosts, corpses, relics and totem heads are discussed. A review of the ways investigations of the agency of the dead might unify bioarchaeologists and further integrate social archaeology into future research is also presented. It is argued that a holistic anthropological approach to humans and their ability to impact their surroundings is not complete if the symbolic and material effects of the dead are not considered.