{"doi":"10.20944/preprints202008.0677.v1","title":"Comparison of Illumina Versus Nanopore 16S rRNA Gene Sequencing of the Human Nasal Microbiota","abstract":"<jats:p>Illumina and nanopore sequencing technologies are powerful tools that can be used to determine the bacterial composition of complex microbial communities. In this study, we compared nasal microbiota results at genus level using both Illumina and nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing. We also monitored the progression of nanopore sequencing in the accurate identification of species, using pure, single species cultures, and evaluated the performance of the nanopore EPI2ME 16S data analysis pipeline. Fifty-nine nasal swabs were sequenced using Illumina MiSeq and Oxford Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing technologies. In addition, five pure cultures of relevant bacterial species were sequenced with the nanopore sequencing technology. The Illumina MiSeq sequence data were processed using bioinformatics modules present in the Mothur software package. Albacore and Guppy base calling, a workflow in nanopore EPI2ME and an in house developed bioinformatics script were used to analyze the nanopore data. At genus level, similar bacterial diversity profiles were found, and five main and established genera were identified by both platforms. However, probably due to mismatching of the nanopore sequence primers, the nanopore sequencing platform identified Corynebacterium in much lower abundance compared to Illumina sequencing. Further, when using default settings in the EPI2ME workflow, almost all sequence reads that seem to belong to the bacterial genus Dolosigranulum and a considerable part to the genus Haemophilus were only identified at family level. Nanopore sequencing of single species cultures demonstrated at least 88% accurate identification of the species at genus and species level for 4/5 strains tested, including improvements in accurate sequence read identification when the basecaller Guppy and Albacore, and when flowcell versions R9.4 and R9.2 were compared.</jats:p>","journal":null,"year":null,"id":651880,"datarank":0.5050943744979712,"base_score":3.367295829986474,"endowment":3.367295829986474,"self_citation_contribution":0.5050943744979712,"citation_network_contribution":0.0,"self_endowment_contribution":0.5050943744979712,"citer_contribution":0.0,"corpus_percentile":null,"corpus_rank":null,"citation_count":28,"citer_count":0,"citers_with_citation_signal":0,"citers_with_endowment":0,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"is_dataset":false,"is_dataset_confidence":null,"is_data_producer":false,"deposit_databanks":null,"is_oa":false,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"has_version_chain":false,"published_date":null,"fair_score":null,"fair_percentile":null,"algorithm_id":"datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6","ranking_scope":"data_only","authors":[{"id":1692518,"name":"Deborah Horst-Kreft","orcid":null,"position":1,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1325657,"name":"Stefan A. Boers","orcid":"0000-0002-1560-6799","position":2,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":5237,"name":"Rick Jansen","orcid":null,"position":3,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692521,"name":"Saskia D. Hiltemann","orcid":null,"position":4,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1198686,"name":"Willem de Koning","orcid":"0000-0002-4594-8423","position":5,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":454286,"name":"Robert Kraaij","orcid":"0000-0003-0416-999X","position":6,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692522,"name":"Maria A. J. de Ridder","orcid":null,"position":7,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692523,"name":"Chantal B. van Houten","orcid":null,"position":8,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692524,"name":"Louis J. Bont","orcid":null,"position":9,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1686701,"name":"Andrew P. Stubbs","orcid":null,"position":10,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692525,"name":"John P. Hays","orcid":null,"position":11,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1700278,"name":"Astrid. P. Heikema","orcid":null,"position":0,"is_corresponding":false}],"reference_count":0,"raw_metadata":{"has_enrichment":true,"resolved":true,"title":"Comparison of Illumina Versus Nanopore 16S rRNA Gene Sequencing of the Human Nasal Microbiota","abstract":"<jats:p>Illumina and nanopore sequencing technologies are powerful tools that can be used to determine the bacterial composition of complex microbial communities. In this study, we compared nasal microbiota results at genus level using both Illumina and nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing. We also monitored the progression of nanopore sequencing in the accurate identification of species, using pure, single species cultures, and evaluated the performance of the nanopore EPI2ME 16S data analysis pipeline. Fifty-nine nasal swabs were sequenced using Illumina MiSeq and Oxford Nanopore 16S rRNA gene sequencing technologies. In addition, five pure cultures of relevant bacterial species were sequenced with the nanopore sequencing technology. The Illumina MiSeq sequence data were processed using bioinformatics modules present in the Mothur software package. Albacore and Guppy base calling, a workflow in nanopore EPI2ME and an in house developed bioinformatics script were used to analyze the nanopore data. At genus level, similar bacterial diversity profiles were found, and five main and established genera were identified by both platforms. However, probably due to mismatching of the nanopore sequence primers, the nanopore sequencing platform identified Corynebacterium in much lower abundance compared to Illumina sequencing. Further, when using default settings in the EPI2ME workflow, almost all sequence reads that seem to belong to the bacterial genus Dolosigranulum and a considerable part to the genus Haemophilus were only identified at family level. Nanopore sequencing of single species cultures demonstrated at least 88% accurate identification of the species at genus and species level for 4/5 strains tested, including improvements in accurate sequence read identification when the basecaller Guppy and Albacore, and when flowcell versions R9.4 and R9.2 were compared.</jats:p>","is_dataset_classified":null,"base_score":3.367295829986474,"endowment":3.367295829986474,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"views":0,"has_version_chain":false,"is_dataset":false,"is_oa":false,"pmid":"19162232","pmcid":null,"openalex_id":"https://openalex.org/W3121151769","authors":[],"funders":[{"funder_name":"European Commission","grant_id":"602860","title":"DEVELOPMENT OF TAILORED ANTIMICROBIAL TREATMENT REGIMENS AND NOVEL \nHOST- PATHOGEN INSIGHTS FOR RESPIRATORY TRACT INFECTIONS AND SEPSIS"}],"total_grants":1,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"citation_trend":[{"year":2020,"count":2},{"year":2021,"count":6},{"year":2022,"count":6},{"year":2023,"count":4},{"year":2024,"count":4},{"year":2025,"count":5},{"year":2026,"count":1}],"oa_status":"green","license":"cc-by","oa_locations":[{"url":"https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202008.0677/v1/download","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202008.0677/v1/download","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202008.0677.v1","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/11/9/1105/pdf","host_type":""},{"url":"https://doi.org/10.3390/genes11091105","host_type":""},{"url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32967250","host_type":""},{"url":"http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes11091105","host_type":""},{"url":"https://pure.eur.nl/en/publications/54400781-7a7c-413d-8c37-792c0179f1c4","host_type":""},{"url":"https://dx.doi.org/10.20944/preprints202008.0677.v1","host_type":""},{"url":"https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes11091105","host_type":""},{"url":"https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/genes11091105","host_type":""}],"fields_of_study":["Mycobacterium research and diagnosis","Sinusitis and nasal conditions","Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies","0301 basic medicine","03 medical and health sciences","0303 health sciences"],"mesh_terms":[],"keywords":["Nanopore sequencing","Nanopore","Illumina dye sequencing","Minion","Biology","DNA sequencing","Computational biology","Metagenomics","16S ribosomal RNA","Genetics","Massive parallel sequencing","Gene","Nanotechnology","Adult","DNA, Bacterial","Male","Adolescent","EMC NIHES-03-77-02","nasal microbiota","Article","Nanopores","RNA, Ribosomal, 16S","Humans","bacterial species","Child","Aged","DNA Primers","Immunology and Microbiology","<i>Corynebacterium</i>","Microbiota","Illumina sequencing","Biology and Life Sciences","High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing","Infant","Genes, rRNA","EMC MM-03-24-01","Middle Aged","EMC MM-04-28-01","Child, Preschool","Female","16S rRNA gene","Nasal Cavity"],"sdg_mappings":[{"sdg_number":14,"sdg_label":"14. Life underwater"}],"linked_datasets":[],"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"database_accessions":[],"source":"live","citation_network_status":"fetched"},"created_at":"2026-08-10T11:06:17.272811Z","pmid":null,"pmcid":null,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"oa_status":null,"license":null,"views":0,"total_file_size_bytes":0,"version_count":0,"fair_f":null,"fair_a":null,"fair_i":null,"fair_r":null,"fair_zscore":null,"fair_rationale":null,"fair_model":null,"fair_agent_version":null,"fair_fulltext_source":null,"fair_has_llm":null,"fair_computed_at":null,"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"db_accessions":[],"linked_datasets":[],"topics":[]}