Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Are similarity-or phylogeny-based methods more appropriate for classifying internal transcribed spacer (ITS) metagenomic amplicons?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Are similarity-or phylogeny-based methods more appropriate for classifying internal transcribed spacer (ITS) metagenomic amplicons?
Do you wish to request the book?
Are similarity-or phylogeny-based methods more appropriate for classifying internal transcribed spacer (ITS) metagenomic amplicons?
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Are similarity-or phylogeny-based methods more appropriate for classifying internal transcribed spacer (ITS) metagenomic amplicons?
2011
Overview
The internal transcribed spacer (ITS) of the nuclear ribosomal DNA region is a widely used species marker for plants and fungi. Recent metagenomic studies using next-generation sequencing, however, generate only partial ITS sequences. Here we compare the performance of partial and full-length ITS sequences with several classification methods. We compiled a full-length ITS data set and created short fragments to simulate the read lengths commonly recovered from current next-generation sequencing platforms. We compared recovery, erroneous recovery, and coverage for the following methods: best BLAST hit classification, MEGAN classification, and automated phylogenetic assignment using the Statistical Assignment Program (SAP). We found that summarizing results with more inclusive taxonomie ranks increased recovery and reduced erroneous recovery. The similarity-based methods BLAST and MEGAN performed consistently across most fragment lengths. Using a phylogeny-based method, SAP runs with queries 400 bp or longer worked best. Overall, BLAST had the highest recovery rates and MEGAN had the lowest erroneous recovery rates. A high-throughput ITS classification method should be selected, taking into consideration read length, an acceptable tradeoff between maximizing the total number of classifications and minimizing the number of erroneous classifications, and the computational speed of the assignment method.
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons,Blackwell Publishing Ltd
