This week, we'll be focusing on the research questions generated by our starters! Unfortunately, my starters are no longer alive and well (pauses for a moment of silence), but we are still scientists, and we must continue to work!
So, the burning question on my reader's mind is probably "What should I have for lunch today?", but the question they should be asking is "What is he sequencing exactly?"! Well, my dear patrons, we are sequencing the 16S (a portion of the ribosome of the cell) rRNA gene and the ITS region, not the entire genome of the starters! The rRNA genes we sequence encode the RNA amount of the 16S location on the ribosomes of bacterial cells, while the ITS region works much in the same way as fungal cells. A benefit of only sequencing these specific regions of DNA is that it enables a researcher to have an easier time sorting through potential differences and similarities between DNA by limiting the amount that one has to sort through. One benefit of sequencing entire genomes will always be to progress academia, but when you limit the sample size of what is being sequenced, you also limit any new discoveries or advancements that could be made.
There are some obstacles with the type of metagenomic sequencing we are performing (Amplicon-based sequencing), however. One such obstacle is the extra steps needed to analyze the samples and the then-added difficulty of preparing/completing the sequencing process. This is in comparison to shotgun metagenomic sequencing, which is just the academic term for sequencing all the DNA in a genome at once. With Amplicon sequencing, we can question how the composition of the starters is affected by different conditions such as temperature and age. Shotgun sequencing may be easier but wouldn't allow the specificity that we enjoy with Amplicon sequencing.
Below I have the graph and legend for the data collected last semester for the 16S sequencing set. I can only paste the 16S below mainly due to file size of both the graphs and legends. There were several trends, the most notable of which was that the majority of the starters mostly comprised themselves of Firmicutes, the scientific name for the Phylum in which they reside. There were other smaller trends but I could not make much sense of them, unfortunately. This could possibly be due to lurking variables in the environment. I did not have a super difficult time analyzing this data, thankfully, but I did have a short period where I was unsure of the process of uploading the data sets to the system... I am not terribly tech-savvy! In order to progress and think critically, we must create and ask questions! A few examples of which include whether or not younger starters have more or less variation in composition, if the comparison of microbial composition changes between older and new starters, and if different fruits have trends as to which microbes are exhibited when sequencing! Thanks so much for following along this week!!!
Citations:
https://view.qiime2.org/visualization/?type=html&src=ee51343a-3068-49d3-b1fe-9ee1230596e9
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3927574/
Comments
Post a Comment