Comparison of direct cDNA and PCR-cDNA Nanopore sequencing of RNA from Escherichia coli isolates

Whole-transcriptome (long-read) RNA sequencing (Oxford Nanopore Technologies, ONT) holds promise for reference-agnostic analysis of differential gene expression in pathogenic bacteria, including for antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs). However, direct cDNA ONT sequencing requires large concentrations of polyadenylated mRNA, and amplification protocols may introduce technical bias. Here we evaluated the impact of direct cDNA- and cDNA PCR-based ONT sequencing on transcriptomic analysis of clinical <i>Escherichia coli</i>. Four <i>E. coli</i> bloodstream infection-associated isolates (<i>n</i>=2 biological replicates per isolate) were sequenced using the ONT Direct cDNA Sequencing SQK-DCS109 and PCR-cDNA Barcoding SQK-PCB111.24 kits. Biological and technical replicates were distributed over eight flow cells using 16 barcodes to minimize batch/barcoding bias. Reads were mapped to a transcript reference and transcript abundance was quantified after <i>in silico</i> depletion of low-abundance and rRNA genes. We found there were strong correlations between read counts using both kits and when restricting the analysis to include only ARGs. We highlighted that correlations were weaker for genes with a higher GC content. Read lengths were longer for the direct cDNA kit compared to the PCR-cDNA kit whereas total yield was higher for the PCR-cDNA kit. In this small but methodologically rigorous evaluation of biological and technical replicates of isolates sequenced with the direct cDNA and PCR-cDNA ONT sequencing kits, we demonstrated that PCR-based amplification substantially improves yield with largely unbiased assessment of core gene and ARG expression. However, users of PCR-based kits should be aware of a small risk of technical bias which appears greater for genes with an unusually high (>52%)/low (<44%) GC content.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Microbial Genomics
Published
2024-10-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1099/mgen.0.001296
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.70

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of direct cDNA and PCR-cDNA Nanopore sequencing of RNA from Escherichia coli isolates

Gillian Rodger, Nicole Stoesser, Samuel Lipworth, Sarah Oakley et al.
3 citations
Microbial Genomics
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
0.70
article

Comparison of direct cDNA and PCR-cDNA Nanopore sequencing of RNA from Escherichia coli isolates

Gillian Rodger, Nicole Stoesser, Samuel Lipworth, Sarah Oakley, David W. Eyre, Lucinda Barrett, Derrick W. Crook
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Whole-transcriptome (long-read) RNA sequencing (Oxford Nanopore Technologies, ONT) holds promise for reference-agnostic analysis of differential gene expression in pathogenic bacteria, including for antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs). However, direct cDNA ONT sequencing requires large concentrations of polyadenylated mRNA, and amplification protocols may introduce technical bias. Here we evaluated the impact of direct cDNA- and cDNA PCR-based ONT sequencing on transcriptomic analysis of clinical <i>Escherichia coli</i>. Four <i>E. coli</i> bloodstream infection-associated isolates (<i>n</i>=2 biological replicates per isolate) were sequenced using the ONT Direct cDNA Sequencing SQK-DCS109 and PCR-cDNA Barcoding SQK-PCB111.24 kits. Biological and technical replicates were distributed over eight flow cells using 16 barcodes to minimize batch/barcoding bias. Reads were mapped to a transcript reference and transcript abundance was quantified after <i>in silico</i> depletion of low-abundance and rRNA genes. We found there were strong correlations between read counts using both kits and when restricting the analysis to include only ARGs. We highlighted that correlations were weaker for genes with a higher GC content. Read lengths were longer for the direct cDNA kit compared to the PCR-cDNA kit whereas total yield was higher for the PCR-cDNA kit. In this small but methodologically rigorous evaluation of biological and technical replicates of isolates sequenced with the direct cDNA and PCR-cDNA ONT sequencing kits, we demonstrated that PCR-based amplification substantially improves yield with largely unbiased assessment of core gene and ARG expression. However, users of PCR-based kits should be aware of a small risk of technical bias which appears greater for genes with an unusually high (>52%)/low (<44%) GC content.

Microbial GenomicsVol. 10(10)
University of Oxford (GB), Oxford BioMedica (United Kingdom) (GB), Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB)
National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit, National Institute for Health and Care Research, John Fell Fund, University of Oxford, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
0.70
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.