2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.tim.2020.05.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Does Intraspecific Variation in rDNA Copy Number Affect Analysis of Microbial Communities?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
74
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 96 publications
(77 citation statements)
references
References 75 publications
3
74
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, we also compared the relative read abundances of the different marker genes against the proportional biovolume for each taxon (Figure 3). Although the copy number of rRNA marker genes was previously proposed as proxy of cell biovolume (due to a positive association between rDNA content and cell size in some marine protist taxa (Lavrinienko et al 2021)), the correlation of biovolume against rRNA gene relative abundances were not stronger than those against psbO (Figures 3 and S5). The relative read abundances for Prochlorococcus and eukaryotic picophytoplankton based either on 16S rDNA or psbO were higher than their proportional biovolume in the same samples, while the opposite occurred for Synechococcus.…”
Section: Comparison With Imaging Dataset Suggested That Psbo Is a Robust Marker Gene For Estimating Relative Cell Abundance Of Phytoplankmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Finally, we also compared the relative read abundances of the different marker genes against the proportional biovolume for each taxon (Figure 3). Although the copy number of rRNA marker genes was previously proposed as proxy of cell biovolume (due to a positive association between rDNA content and cell size in some marine protist taxa (Lavrinienko et al 2021)), the correlation of biovolume against rRNA gene relative abundances were not stronger than those against psbO (Figures 3 and S5). The relative read abundances for Prochlorococcus and eukaryotic picophytoplankton based either on 16S rDNA or psbO were higher than their proportional biovolume in the same samples, while the opposite occurred for Synechococcus.…”
Section: Comparison With Imaging Dataset Suggested That Psbo Is a Robust Marker Gene For Estimating Relative Cell Abundance Of Phytoplankmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Biovolume is a proxy of biomass, which is a relevant variable for studies of energy and matter fluxes such as food web structures and biogeochemical cycles. However, there is still little consensus for the use of rRNA gene as a biovolume estimator due to the poor correlations reported in many studies (Lamb et al, 2019;Lavrinienko, Jernfors, Koskimäki, Pirttilä, & Watts, 2021;Santoferrara, 2019;van der Loos & Nijland, 2021). Instead, there are attempts to infer relative cell abundances from rRNA gene metabarcoding by correcting the copy number variation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another aspect that prevents data analyses from being fully quantitative is the potential of multiple copies of marker genes present per organism, which may also vary across taxa. For example, the 16S rRNA gene copy number per bacterial cell can vary between 1 and 18 and can additionally show variation within different strains of the same species (Stoddard et al, 2014;Coenye and Vandamme, 2003;Lavrinienko et al, 2021). Therefore, relying solely on the number and diversity of markers such a 16S rRNA genes can lead to inaccurate estimates of the relative abundance and diversity of microbial communities.…”
Section: Compositionality Necessitates Careful Data Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…rDNA is abundant in many eukaryotic genomes, typically varying from tens to thousands of copies depending upon the species Parks et al, 2018;Prokopowich et al, 2003;Symonová, 2019). Moreover, rDNA copy number can vary widely among individuals within a species (Lavrinienko, Jernfors, et al, 2020;Symonová, 2019;Weider et al, 2005), and geographic variation in rDNA content has been documented in diverse taxa (reviewed by Weider et al, 2005), for example, among plant populations that differ in altitude and latitude (Strauss & Tsai, 1988), in Daphnia (Harvey et al, 2020), and among human populations (Parks et al, 2018). As a tandemly repeating locus, rDNA is prone to copy-number mutations, a feature that is exacerbated by topological stress from opening of the helical DNA structure and collisions between replication and transcription machinery due to frequent transcription (Salim & Gerton, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%