2019
DOI: 10.1002/iub.2216
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contaminations in (meta)genome data: An open issue for the scientific community

Abstract: In recent years, the high throughput and the low cost of next‐generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have led to an increase of the amount of (meta)genomic data, revolutionizing genomic research studies. However, the quality of sequencing data could be affected by experimental errors derived from defective methods and protocols. This represents a serious problem for the scientific community with a negative impact on the correctness of studies that involve genomic sequence analysis. As a countermeasure, sever… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Importantly, this is a recurring problem which is completely ignored by most metagenomic analysis tools. We continually find new errors in all new metagenomic references, indicating that this problem is also growing (De Simone et al 2020).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Importantly, this is a recurring problem which is completely ignored by most metagenomic analysis tools. We continually find new errors in all new metagenomic references, indicating that this problem is also growing (De Simone et al 2020).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, dark matter seems to be particularly common in eDNA as compared to bulk samples (Andújar et al 2018). However, it should be mentioned that the high number of prokaryotic sequences in COI metabarcoding data is also reflecting known issues with contamination (Kumar et al 2013;Dittami and Corre 2017;De Simone et al 2020), incorrectly labeled reference sequences (Steinegger and Salzberg 2020) and holobionts (Gilbert et al 2012;Salvucci 2016) in eukaryotic genomes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, as noted previously, these studies are once again hindered by the lack of diversity in modern microbiome studies [30,49]. With mostly modern, industrialized pets represented in studies, our definition of what constitutes a 'normal' canine microbiome is skewed, which limits our ability to successfully discriminate between ancient contaminants and ancient microbes of interest [59,60]. The dogs represented in these ancient studies are frequently human-associated, postdomestication; but their lifestyles, environment and diet mirror none of the dogs studied today [61][62][63][64][65][66].…”
Section: (B) Canine Microbiomes Over Timementioning
confidence: 99%