Comparisons of distance methods for combining covariates and abundances in microbiome studies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Fukuyama J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4532668 | biostudies-literature | 2012
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Comparisons of distance methods for combining covariates and abundances in microbiome studies.
Fukuyama Julia J McMurdie Paul J PJ Dethlefsen Les L Relman David A DA Holmes Susan S
Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 20120101
This article compares different methods for combining abundance data, phylogenetic trees and clinical covariates in a nonparametric setting. In particular we study the output from the principal coordinates analysis on UNIFRAC and WEIGHTED UNIFRAC distances and the output from a double principal coordinate analyses DPCOA using distances computed on the phylogenetic tree. We also present power comparisons for some of the standard tests of phylogenetic signal between different types of samples. The ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Longitudinal, prospective studies often rely on multi-omics approaches, wherein various specimens are analyzed for genomic, metabolomic, and/or transcriptomic profiles. In practice, longitudinal studies in humans and other animals routinely suffer from subject dropout, irregular sampling, and biological variation that may not be normally distributed. As a result, testing hypotheses about observations over time can be statistically challenging without performing transformations and dramatic simplifications to the dataset, causing a loss of longitudinal power in the process. Here, we introduce splinectomeR, an R package that uses smoothing splines to summarize data for straightforward hypothesis testing in longitudinal studies. The package is open-source, and can be used interactively within R or run from the command line as a standalone tool. We present a novel in-depth analysis of a published large-scale microbiome study as an example of its utility in straightforward testing of key hypotheses. We expect that splinectomeR will be a useful tool for hypothesis testing in longitudinal microbiome studies.
| S-EPMC5924793 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundObservational studies provide important information about the effects of exposures that cannot be easily studied in clinical trials, such as nutritional exposures, but are subject to confounding. Investigators adjust for confounders by entering them as covariates in analytic models.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the reporting and credibility of methods for selection of covariates in nutritional epidemiology studies.MethodsWe sampled 150 nutritional epidemiology studies published in 2007/2008 and 2017/2018 from the top 5 high-impact nutrition and medical journals and extracted information on methods for selection of covariates.ResultsMost studies did not report selecting covariates a priori (94.0%) or criteria for selection of covariates (63.3%). There was general inconsistency in choice of covariates, even among studies investigating similar questions. One-third of studies did not acknowledge potential for residual confounding in their discussion.ConclusionStudies often do not report methods for selection of covariates, follow available guidance for selection of covariates, nor discuss potential for residual confounding.
| S-EPMC6778415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs high-throughput genomic technologies become accurate and affordable, an increasing number of data sets have been accumulated in the public domain and genomic information integration and meta-analysis have become routine in biomedical research. In this paper, we focus on microarray meta-analysis, where multiple microarray studies with relevant biological hypotheses are combined in order to improve candidate marker detection. Many methods have been developed and applied in the literature, but their performance and properties have only been minimally investigated. There is currently no clear conclusion or guideline as to the proper choice of a meta-analysis method given an application; the decision essentially requires both statistical and biological considerations.ResultsWe performed 12 microarray meta-analysis methods for combining multiple simulated expression profiles, and such methods can be categorized for different hypothesis setting purposes: (1) HS(A): DE genes with non-zero effect sizes in all studies, (2) HS(B): DE genes with non-zero effect sizes in one or more studies and (3) HS(r): DE gene with non-zero effect in "majority" of studies. We then performed a comprehensive comparative analysis through six large-scale real applications using four quantitative statistical evaluation criteria: detection capability, biological association, stability and robustness. We elucidated hypothesis settings behind the methods and further apply multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) and an entropy measure to characterize the meta-analysis methods and data structure, respectively.ConclusionsThe aggregated results from the simulation study categorized the 12 methods into three hypothesis settings (HS(A), HS(B), and HS(r)). Evaluation in real data and results from MDS and entropy analyses provided an insightful and practical guideline to the choice of the most suitable method in a given application. All source files for simulation and real data are available on the author's publication website.
| S-EPMC3898528 | biostudies-literature
Project description:MotivationIn the field of microbiome analysis, there exist various statistical methods that have been developed for identifying differentially expressed features, that account for the overdispersion and the high sparsity of microbiome data. However, due to the differences in statistical models or test formulations, it is quite often to have inconsistent significance results across statistical methods, that makes it difficult to determine the importance of microbiome taxa. Thus, it is practically important to have the integration of the result from all statistical methods to determine the importance of microbiome taxa. A standard meta-analysis is a powerful tool for integrative analysis and it provides a summary measure by combining p-values from various statistical methods. While there are many meta-analyses available, it is not easy to choose the best meta-analysis that is the most suitable for microbiome data.ResultsIn this study, we investigated which meta-analysis method most adequately represents the importance of microbiome taxa. We considered Fisher's method, minimum value of p method, Simes method, Stouffer's method, Kost method, and Cauchy combination test. Through simulation studies, we showed that Cauchy combination test provides the best combined value of p in the sense that it performed the best among the examined methods while controlling the type 1 error rates. Furthermore, it produced high rank similarity with the true ranks. Through the real data application of colorectal cancer microbiome data, we demonstrated that the most highly ranked microbiome taxa by Cauchy combination test have been reported to be associated with colorectal cancer.
| S-EPMC9686280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesSeveral methods are commonly used for meta-analyses of diagnostic studies, such as the bivariate linear mixed model (LMM). It estimates the overall sensitivity, specificity, their correlation, diagnostic OR (DOR) and the area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) estimates. Nevertheless, the bivariate LMM makes potentially unrealistic assumptions (ie, normality of within-study estimates), which could be avoided by the bivariate generalised linear mixed model (GLMM). This article aims at investigating the real-world performance of the bivariate LMM and GLMM using meta-analyses of diagnostic studies from the Cochrane Library.MethodsWe compared the bivariate LMM and GLMM using the relative differences in the overall sensitivity and specificity, their 95% CI widths, between-study variances, and the correlation between the (logit) sensitivity and specificity. We also explored their relationships with the number of studies, number of subjects, overall sensitivity and overall specificity.ResultsAmong the extracted 1379 meta-analyses, point estimates of overall sensitivities and specificities by the bivariate LMM and GLMM were generally similar, but their CI widths could be noticeably different. The bivariate GLMM generally produced narrower CIs than the bivariate LMM when meta-analyses contained 2-5 studies. For meta-analyses with <100 subjects or the overall sensitivities or specificities close to 0% or 100%, the bivariate LMM could produce substantially different AUCs, DORs and DOR CI widths from the bivariate GLMM.ConclusionsThe variation of estimates calls into question the appropriateness of the normality assumption within individual studies required by the bivariate LMM. In cases of notable differences presented in these methods' results, the bivariate GLMM may be preferred.
| S-EPMC9086644 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Microbiome composition profiles generated from 16S rRNA sequencing have been extensively studied for their usefulness in phenotype trait prediction, including for complex diseases such as diabetes and obesity. These microbiome compositions have typically been quantified in the form of Operational Taxonomic Unit (OTU) count matrices. However, alternate approaches such as Amplicon Sequence Variants (ASV) have been used, as well as the direct use of k-mer sequence counts. The overall effect of these different types of predictors when used in concert with various machine learning methods has been difficult to assess, due to varied combinations described in the literature. Here we provide an in-depth investigation of more than 1,000 combinations of these three clustering/counting methods, in combination with varied choices for normalization and filtering, grouping at various taxonomic levels, and the use of more than ten commonly used machine learning methods for phenotype prediction. The use of short k-mers, which have computational advantages and conceptual simplicity, is shown to be effective as a source for microbiome-based prediction. Among machine-learning approaches, tree-based methods show consistent, though modest, advantages in prediction accuracy. We describe the various advantages and disadvantages of combinations in analysis approaches, and provide general observations to serve as a useful guide for future trait-prediction explorations using microbiome data.
| S-EPMC7772236 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Integrated microbiome and metabolomics analyses hold the potential to reveal interactions between host and microbiota in relation to disease risks. However, there are few studies evaluating how field methods influence fecal microbiome characterization and metabolomics profiling. Methods: Five fecal collection methods [immediate freezing at -20°C without preservative, OMNIgene GUT, 95% ethanol, RNAlater, and Flinders Technology Associates (FTA) cards] were used to collect 40 fecal samples from eight healthy volunteers. We performed gut microbiota 16S rRNA sequencing, untargeted metabolomics profiling, and targeted metabolomics focusing on short chained fatty acids (SCFAs). Metrics included ?-diversity and ?-diversity as well as distributions of predominant phyla. To evaluate the concordance with the "gold standard" immediate freezing, the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for alternate fecal collection systems were calculated. Correlations between SCFAs and gut microbiota were also examined. Results: The FTA cards had the highest ICCs compared to the immediate freezing method for ?-diversity indices (ICCs = 0.96, 0.96, 0.76 for Shannon index, Simpson's Index, Chao-1 Index, respectively), followed by OMNIgene GUT, RNAlater, and 95% ethanol. High ICCs (all >0.88) were observed for all methods for the ?-diversity metric. For untargeted metabolomics, in comparison to immediate freezing which detected 621 metabolites at ?75% detectability level, 95% ethanol showed the largest overlapping set of metabolites (n = 430; 69.2%), followed by FTA cards (n = 330; 53.1%) and OMNIgene GUT (n = 213; 34.3%). Both OMNIgene GUT (ICCs = 0.82, 0.93, 0.64) and FTA cards (ICCs = 0.87, 0.85, 0.54) had acceptable ICCs for the top three predominant SCFAs (butyric acid, propionic acid and acetic acid). Nominally significant correlations between bacterial genera and SCFAs (P < 0.05) were observed in fecal samples collected by different methods. Of note, a high correlation between the genus Blautia (known butyrate producer) and butyric acid was observed for both immediate freezing (r = 0.83) and FTA cards (r = 0.74). Conclusions: Four alternative fecal collection methods are generally comparable with immediate freezing, but there are differences in certain measures of the gut microbiome and fecal metabolome across methods. Choice of method depends on the research interests, simplicity of fecal collection procedures and ease of transportation to the lab, especially for large epidemiological studies.
| S-EPMC6127643 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Because different sampling techniques will provide different abundance values, it is currently difficult to compare results among many studies to form holistic understandings of how abundance influences ant ecology. Using three sampling methods in the same location we found pitfall traps best confirmed yellow crazy ant A. gracilipes presence recording the fewest zero values (9.1%), card counts were the least reliable (67.1%), and tuna lures were intermediate (30.1%). The abundance of A. gracilipes from card counts ranged from 0 to 20, in pitfall traps from 0 to 325, and the full range of tuna lure abundance scores (0-7) were sampled. We then determined the relationships between these three standard ant sampling techniques for Anoplolepis gracilipes abundance. Irrespective of the data transformation method, the strongest relationship was between pitfall traps and tuna lures, and the least strong was between pitfall traps and card counts. We then demonstrate the utility of this knowledge by analysing A. gracilipes abundance reported within published literature to show where the populations in those studies sit on an abundance spectrum. We also comment on insights into the relative utility of the three methods we used to determine A. gracilipes abundance among populations of varying abundance. Pitfall traps was the most reliable method to determine if the species was present at the sample level. Tuna lures were predominantly reliable for quantifying the presence of workers, but were limited by the number of workers that can gather around a spoonful of tuna. Card counts were the quickest method, but were seemingly only useful when A. gracilipes abundance is not low. Finally we discuss how environmental and biological variation needs to be accounted for in future studies to better standardise sampling protocols to help progress ecology as a precision science.
| S-EPMC9200322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The diet plays a major role in shaping gut microbiome composition and function in both humans and animals, and dietary intervention trials are often used to investigate and understand these effects. A plethora of statistical methods for analysing the differential abundance of microbial taxa exists, and new methods are constantly being developed, but there is a lack of benchmarking studies and clear consensus on the best multivariate statistical practices. This makes it hard for a biologist to decide which method to use. We compared the outcomes of generic multivariate ANOVA (ASCA and FFMANOVA) against statistical methods commonly used for community analyses (PERMANOVA and SIMPER) and methods designed for analysis of count data from high-throughput sequencing experiments (ALDEx2, ANCOM and DESeq2). The comparison is based on both simulated data and five published dietary intervention trials representing different subjects and study designs. We found that the methods testing differences at the community level were in agreement regarding both effect size and statistical significance. However, the methods that provided ranking and identification of differentially abundant operational taxonomic units (OTUs) gave incongruent results, implying that the choice of method is likely to influence the biological interpretations. The generic multivariate ANOVA tools have the flexibility needed for analysing multifactorial experiments and provide outputs at both the community and OTU levels; good performance in the simulation studies suggests that these statistical tools are also suitable for microbiome data sets.
| S-EPMC8601541 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The establishment of human gut microbiota commences initially in utero. Meconium-the first fecal material passed after birth-can be used to study fetal gut contents; however, processing meconium samples for microbiome studies presents significant technical challenges. Meconium hosts a low biomass microbiome, is tar-like in texture and contains high concentrations of PCR inhibitors. This study aimed to evaluate four different DNA extraction methods to elucidate the most effective method for bacterial DNA recovery and sequencing analysis from first-pass meconium. Samples from five infants were collected and processed using the following extraction kits: (1) Qiagen QIAamp DNA Stool Mini (QS); (2) Qiagen QIAamp DNA Microbiome (QM); (3) MoBio PowerSoil (PS); (4) MoBio MagAttract PowerMicrobiome (PM). Additionally, Kit PM was employed with a double inhibitor removal treatment (IRT) step (PM2). Bacterial DNA recovery was assessed by qPCR. Any PCR inhibition in samples was measured by spiking DNA eluates with 0.1 ng of pure Streptococcus agalactiae (GBS) DNA followed by qPCR quantitation. Kit PM yielded the highest average total DNA yield (79.3 ng per gram of meconium). Samples extracted with kit PS had the highest detectable levels of 16S rRNA gene by qPCR. The ability of each kit to overcome PCR inhibition varied, with qPCR on GBS-spiked DNA from kits QS, QM, PS, and PM recovering 87.1, 91.0, 88.8, and 37.9% GBS DNA, respectively. Double IRT improved the performance of kit PM, increasing GBS recovery to 56.5%. However, once DNA yield was normalized to the level recovered with the other kits 100% of GBS DNA was detected, suggesting that levels of PCR inhibitors are related to DNA yield from kit PM. Ion Torrent 16S rRNA gene sequencing revealed a high level of inter-kit variation in meconium microbiome structure. In particular, kit QM showed a bias toward extracting Firmicute DNA, while the other kits extracted primarily Proteobacterial DNA. Choice of extraction kit greatly impacts on the ability to extract and detect bacterial DNA in meconium and on the microbiome community structure generated from these samples.
| S-EPMC5826226 | biostudies-literature