Comparison of Oral Microbiome Survey Methods
Author Information
Author(s): Ahn Jiyoung, Yang Liying, Paster Bruce J., Ganly Ian, Morris Luc, Pei Zhiheng, Hayes Richard B.
Primary Institution: New York University School of Medicine
Hypothesis
How do 16S rRNA gene sequencing and DNA microarray compare in identifying oral microbiome profiles?
Conclusion
Both methods for assessing oral microbiome profiles are highly correlated, but pyrosequencing offers broader identification capabilities.
Supporting Evidence
- 16S rRNA pyrosequencing identified 77 genera while HOMIM identified 49, with 37 genera detected by both methods.
- High correlations were found between the two methods for major phyla and common genera.
- More than 98% of classified bacteria were assigned to the 37 genera detected by both methods.
Takeaway
Scientists looked at two ways to study bacteria in our mouths and found that both methods work well together, but one can find more types of bacteria.
Methodology
Oral wash samples were collected and analyzed using 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing and a custom DNA microarray.
Potential Biases
Potential misidentification or cross-hybridization in the microarray method.
Limitations
The study may not capture all rare bacterial taxa due to the design of the microarray.
Participant Demographics
20 subjects aged 19-89, 35% male and 65% female, including patients with oral cancer, premalignant lesions, and healthy controls.
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.65
Statistical Significance
p=0.65
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website