-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 204
CBW IMPACTT Metagenome sequence data analysis with Kraken2 and Phyloseq
This tutorial is for the 2023 CBW-IMPACTT bioinformatics workshop running in Calgary from July 5-7th.
Authors: Robyn Wright and Morgan Langille
This tutorial has been adapted from the 2022 IMPACTT bioinformatics workshops, but it now uses different samples that match those in the amplicon sequencing part of this workshop. We have also added the part that includes visualisation of results in Phyloseq, and removed parts related to initial quality control of reads.
2. Generating Taxonomic Profiles with Kraken2
4. Visualising the results using Phyloseq in R
The main goal of this tutorial is to introduce students to different approaches for the taxonomic profiling of metagenomic data from microbiome samples. Throughout this tutorial we will emphasize that there is not a one-size-fits-all pipeline for analyzing MGS data. For example some individuals may opt to examine their data using a marker-based approach such as MetaPhlAn3 while others may opt to use a kmer based strategy such as Kraken2+Braken. Furthermore, in a subsequent module in this workshop students will also learn about another approach for examining microbiome data using metagenomic assembly and binning.
Throughout this tutorial there will be questions are aimed at helping students understand the various steps in reference based metagenomic profiling. The answers are found on this page.
This tutorial is based on our Metagenomics SOP and we are also working on a list of resources and papers that may be useful for beginners (or those that are not beginners!) in the microbiome field here.
Properly citing bioinformatic tools is important to ensure that developers are getting the proper recognition. If you use any of the commands in this tutorial for your own work be sure to cite the relevant tools listed below!
- GNU Parallel (website, paper)
- Microbiome Helper (website, paper)
- Kraken2 (website, paper)
- Bracken (website, paper)
- Phyloseq (website, paper)
- Vegan (website)
Usually the first steps in metagenome analysis would involve:
- (1) Quality control - checking that all of the reads are of sufficient quality to use in our analysis - and primer trimming - removal of any of the primers/adapters used in sequencing
- (2) removal of unwanted reads - we usually check that there are no PhiX reads left over from the sequencing (usually added into Illumina sequencing runs for internal quality control) and may also remove any host-associated reads, for example, in human studies we would usually remove reads that map to the human genome
- (3) joining of the forward and reverse reads. Both of the first two steps can be performed using Kneaddata
The third step could be with a program that checks for matches between the reads, but as metagenome reads often don't have a large - or any - overlap, we may just simply concatenate the reads together. We don't have time for these steps in todays workshop, but you can read/work through the previous workshop that we ran for a more complete overview of metagenome sequencing analysis.
First open up your terminal and log in to the server instance.
Next, we'll make a new directory to work from, change into it and then create a link to the sequence reads we'll be using.
cd workspace/
mkdir metagenome_workshop
cd metagenome_workshop/
ln -s ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/cat_reads/ .
Note: the ln -s command is an alternative to copying a file across and is like creating a desktop shortcut to a folder; we don't need to take up additional storage space but will still be able to use these files. It won't always be appropriate if we need to make modifications to files, but works well for cases like this where we wouldn't want to modify our raw data anyway.
If you want to take a look at the read files, you can do this with e.g. less cat_reads/BB190.fastq. Press q to get out of this view.
Next, we'll activate the conda environment that we'll be using for this part of the workshop:
conda activate taxonomic
If, during the workshop, you get logged out, you can get back to where you need to be by running:
cd workspace/metagenome_workshop/
conda activate taxonomic
After we have performed quality control on all of our reads the next step is to use Kraken2 to classify them with taxonomic labels. Kraken2 is one of many popular tools for classifying metagenomic reads into taxonomic profiles. In this case Kraken2 uses a kmer approach to assign reads to specific taxonomic lineages (look back at the lecture slides to remind yourself how kmers are used to classify reads).
There are several choices that we can make when classifying our samples that can have a very significant impact on both the proportion of reads in samples that we are able to classify as well as the taxa that are classified (if a taxon doesn't exist in our database, then we won't be able to classify it in our samples). The biggest choices here are the reference database that we use as well as the confidence threshold. We have recently published a paper that addresses this in some detail, but we'll summarise some of the most important points below.
As it will take a few minutes for Kraken2 to run, we will just start running the commands and then there are a few things that we should understand about what we're doing.
First of all, we're going to make some directories to hold our results:
mkdir kraken2_kreport
mkdir kraken2_outraw
When you're running Kraken2 you should always be careful that you've created these folders before you run it! It won't give you an error message telling you that the folders don't exist, but it won't be able to create any output files so your time running it will have been wasted if you don't have the folders made.
Next we will run the Kraken2 command using parallel. Notice here that we now have two arguments going into parallel with ::: at the end, so they are named {1} and {2} inside the command. Parallel is a really useful tool that allows us to run the same command on multiple files and with multiple parameters at once. In this workshop, we've focused more on visualisation and haven't given a tutorial on using parallel, but if you'd like to see that, it's in this previous workshop here.
parallel -j 1 --eta --dry-run 'kraken2 --db ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/k2_pluspf_08gb_20230314/ --threads 4 --output kraken2_outraw/{1/.}_{2}_minikraken.kraken.txt --report kraken2_kreport/{1/.}_{2}_minikraken.kreport --use-names {1} --confidence {2}' ::: cat_reads/*.fastq ::: 0.0 0.1
Here there are a lot of different options that we've specified in this command:
-
parallel -j 1 --eta --dry-run- here we've specified the number of jobs for parallel to use (-j 1), we've asked parallel to tell us a rough time to completion (--eta) and we're checking the command that will be run before running it (--dry-run). -
--db- This option points to the location of the database you want Kraken2 to use for classification. We have already set this AWS instance with the minikraken database. -
--threads 4-This option indicates that we want to use four processors for each Kraken2 job -
--output- This argument points to the file name we want to output our classifications to. -
--report- This argument points to the file name we want to output a more detailed classifcation report for each sample. These more in-depth classification reports are required to correct abundance estimates using bracken. -
--use-names- This indicates we want the classifier to output the taxon names rather than their NCBI IDs. -
--confidence- This allows us to set the confidence threshold so as reads with a low proportion of their k-mers classified as the taxon will be unclassified in the output (see below).
Check to make sure the command you are running is the one you expected using the --dry-run flag. Once you are sure remove the flag and run the command. This is really useful when you have a command that will take a really long time to run, so you don't waste time running the wrong command.
Some summary information will be output to the console when you run this command including the number of sequences that were classified versus unclassified in each sample.
Unlike metagenomic assembly, we will be classifying our sequenced reads based on how similar they are to reads we have already classified in a reference database. In the Kraken2 manual, the Kraken2 developers recommend building a "standard" database that is comprised of the bacterial, archaeal and viral domains as well as the human genome and a collection of known vectors (UniVec_Core). There are commands given in the manual for doing this, and a relatively up-to-date version of this database is also available for download via the Langmead lab here. This database requires approximately 100 Gb RAM/memory to build, and 40 Gb RAM to run. The Langmead Lab also provides some secondary databases that are capped at different sizes, and also that contain other domains in addition to the bacteria, archaea and viruses. In our paper, we found that the best database to use with a range of simulated and mock samples (where the real composition of the sample was known) was one that contained all genomes from the NCBI Reference Sequence Database (NCBI RefSeq), and can be downloaded from here. However, this database is approximately 1.2 Tb and will therefore be too large for many researchers to use. We found that bigger databases weren't always better, and without access to a server with very large amounts of RAM, the best options were smaller, curated databases - we recommend that everyone thinks carefully about this choice prior to use on their own samples, and provided some guidance on this in the preprint.
Because we only have a limited amount of RAM/memory on our instances here, we will be using the Standard-8 database (standard database capped at 8 Gb, which we'll call the minikraken database). The smaller size means that we can run it on workstations with a lower amount of RAM, but this comes at the cost of reduced performance. Also note that by default, kraken uses NCBI taxonomy (and requires a taxonomy structure similar to that of the NCBI taxonomy, where all taxa at all ranks are assigned a taxonomic ID, and the "parent" taxon is known for all), however, there are a number of other databases that users have made using different styles of taxonomy such as the Genome Taxonomy Database.
As mentioned above, Kraken2, uses exact alignment of k-mers (sub-sequences of length k) to a reference database for query read classification. Because k-mers within a read could map to multiple sequences within the database when using Kraken2, a lowest common ancestor (LCA) approach is used to classify the sequence, and the number of k-mers mapping to a given taxon are calculated as a proportion of the number of k-mers within that sequence that do not have ambiguous nucleotides. This proportion of k-mers mapping to a taxon is called the “confidence”, and there is a confidence threshold that can be set within the program (0 by default), where a taxonomic classification is only taken if it is above this pre-defined threshold. For a short example of this, have a look at (this figure in the Kraken2 paper).
Here, we can see that the query sequence has been broken up into 27 k-mers. 11 of these k-mers are unclassified (shown in white), while 10 have been classified as the blue taxon, 4 as the orange taxon, 1 as the purple taxon and 1 as the red taxon. In this example, the purple taxon is the ancestor of all taxa and the blue is the ancestor of the orange. The sequence will be classified to the leaf node, or the lowest rank possible, and we can use the number of k-mers that were classified to calculate how confident we are in that taxonomic assignment. Our confidence that this sequence belongs to the orange taxon if 4/27, or 0.15. Our confidence that it belongs to the blue taxon is (10+4)/27 = 14/27 = 0.52, and our confidence that it belongs to the purple taxon is the sum of all classified k-mers, so 16/27 = 0.59. By default, the confidence threshold that Kraken uses is 0.00, which would mean that the sequence would be classified as the orange taxon. If we increased the confidence threshold to 0.20 then the sequence would be classified as the blue taxon, and if we increased it to 0.60 or higher then the sequence would be unclassified.
Again, you can see our paper if you want to see how this impacts the classifications given in more detail (and for more guidance on this), but as the confidence threshold is increased, fewer reads will be classified, but we can be more certain that the reads that are classified are classified correctly. To some extent, the "best" confidence threshold to use will depend on your research question and whether you are more concerned with ensuring that you identify all taxa that you possibly can (no false negatives), or that all of the taxa that you do identify are actually in the sample (no false positives). If you are running your own samples, then it may be worth taking a small (representative) subset and running them with a few different thresholds to see how the confidence threshold impacts this.
Now we will take a look at some of the output files from Kraken2. First take a look at a file in the kraken2_kreport_refseq folder with head -30 kraken2_kreport/BB190_0.0_minikraken.kreport. The first few lines should look something like this:
97.23 4823613 4823613 U 0 unclassified
2.77 137575 93 R 1 root
2.77 137343 1184 R1 131567 cellular organisms
2.68 133086 12486 D 2 Bacteria
1.29 63812 5448 P 1224 Pseudomonadota
0.79 39351 3632 C 28211 Alphaproteobacteria
0.59 29301 3457 O 356 Hyphomicrobiales
0.38 18619 2121 F 41294 Nitrobacteraceae
0.31 15439 5852 G 374 Bradyrhizobium
0.07 3672 3672 S 1437360 Bradyrhizobium erythrophlei
0.05 2456 543 G1 2631580 unclassified Bradyrhizobium
0.00 170 170 S 2782654 Bradyrhizobium sp. 186
0.00 162 162 S 2782665 Bradyrhizobium sp. 200
0.00 131 131 S 2782641 Bradyrhizobium sp. 170
The columns here are (from the Kraken2 manual):
| Column Number | Data Type |
|---|---|
| 1 | The percentage of sequences covered by the clade rooted at this taxon |
| 2 | The number of sequences covered by the clade rooted at this taxon |
| 3 | The number of sequences assigned directly to this taxon |
| 4 | A rank code, indicating (U)nclassified, (R)oot, (D)omain, (K)ingdom, (P)hylum, (C)lass, (O)rder, (F)amily, (G)enus, or (S)pecies |
| 5 | NCBI taxonomic ID number |
| 6 | Indented scientific name |
You should notice first that we have a very large proportion of unclassified reads. In the example output above, 97.23% of sequences were unclassified while only 2.77% of sequences were classified. The output is hierarchical, so going down, we can see that 2.77% of sequences were from cellular organisms (so almost all of the classified sequences), and 2.68% were Bacterial sequences. If we look at the second and third columns for the Bacteria, we can see that 12,486 of the 4,823,613 sequences that were classified as Bacteria weren't classified to any rank lower than Bacteria (Domain rank).
The reason that we have so few reads classified here is because we've used the smallest Kraken2 database. We typically find that as the size of the database increases, so does the proportion of reads that can be classified because there's a higher chance that something similar to each of your reads exists in the database. Unfortunately the full RefSeq database is far too big to use in this workshop (it's ~800 GB), but that's what we've used to classify the samples for the data that you're using in the Phyloseq part of the workshop, below. Now take a look at the same sample that's been classified using the full database: head -30 ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/BB190_0.0_RefSeqV214.kreport
Question 1: How many more reads are classified using the full database than with the mini database?
Now take a look at a sample that was classified using a different confidence threshold with the full database, e.g.: head -30 ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/BB190_0.1_RefSeqV214.kreport
Question 2: What do you notice about the number, or proportion, of reads that have been classified?
Now look at the same sample but classified with the mini database and a higher confidence threshold, e.g.: head -30 kraken2_kreport/BB190_0.1_minikraken.kreport
Question 3: What do you notice now about the number of reads that have been classified? Does this seem like an appropriate confidence threshold to use?
The raw output files created by Kraken2 should be corrected using Bracken to get more accurate estimations on the abundance of different taxa at various taxonomic levels. While Kraken2 classifies each of our reads to their best locations within a taxonomic tree, in some cases this will result in a read being placed higher up in the tree due to two species or sometimes even genera (or higher ranks) sharing the exact same sequence (k-mer) to which that read matched. Bracken can be used to solve this issue by taking these reads and mapping them back to the genomes they might belong to. By doing this it generates new abundance estimates that take into account the problem laid out above.
Once Kraken2 has finished running, we can run Bracken on these samples. Bracken doesn't require much memory at all so we can each run it at the same time without running into problems.
First we will make a directory to output the results to:
conda activate bracken
mkdir bracken_out
Now we'll run Bracken:
parallel -j 2 'bracken -d ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/k2_pluspf_08gb_20230314/ -i {} -o bracken_out/{/.}.species.bracken -r 100 -l S -t 1' ::: kraken2_kreport/*minikraken.kreport
Here we are again using Parallel to run bracken on any .kreport files that we might have.
Here, we're giving Bracken several options:
-
-d- The database folder that contains the Bracken files in addition to the Kraken2 database (the e.g.database100mers.kmer_distribfiles) -
-i- The input kreport file from kraken2, denoted for parallel by {1} because it's the first option outside of the quoted bracken command after the::: -
-r- The length of the reads used for mapping -
-l- The level at which to estimate taxon abundance (S indicates species), denoted for parallel by {2} because it's the second option outside of the quoted bracken command -
-t- The number of reads required for a taxon to be used in the abundance estimate
Note generally you would increase the -t argument to be somewhere between 0.1-1% of the total average read depth, however, we are leaving that for simplicity right now. The reason for this is that k-mer based strategies such as kraken2 are notorious for making a large number of low abundance false positives. Check-out this paper or our paper for more information.
The final step in generating our taxonomic profiles is collecting all the results from each sample into a single file. This can be done using a helper script that comes installed with bracken!
mkdir bracken_out_merged
combine_bracken_outputs.py --files bracken_out/*minikraken.species.bracken -o bracken_out_merged/merged_output_minikraken.species.bracken
conda deactivate
conda activate taxonomic
Lets take a look at our resulting file with the less command. You will notice that the file has different columns corresponding to different information about a single taxon.
| Column Name | Data Type |
|---|---|
| name | Taxonomic ID |
| taxonomy_id | NCBI taxonomic ID |
| taxonomy lvl | Character representing the level of taxonomy |
| SAMPLE.species.bracken_num | Number of reads that aligned to this classifcation for this SAMPLE |
| SAMPLE.species.bracken_frac | Proportion of reads that aligned to this classification for this SAMPLE |
| SAMPLE2.species.bracken_num | Number of reads that aligned to this classifcation for this SAMPLE2 |
| SAMPLE2.species.bracken_frac | Proportion of reads that aligned to this classification for this SAMPLE2 |
| etc. |
We can also copy across the bracken files for the RefSeqCompleteV214 database:
ln -s ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/kraken2_kreport/*RefSeq* kraken2_kreport/
ln -s ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/kraken2_outraw/*RefSeq* kraken2_outraw/
ln -s ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/bracken_out_merged/merged_output_RefSeq.species.bracken bracken_out_merged/
ln -s ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/combine_merged_files.py .
ln -s ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/Blueberry_metadata_metagenome.tsv .
Finally, we'll create a single output file that contains the information for both the classifications using MiniKraken that we've run, as well as the RefSeqCompleteV214 database that we'd run prior to the workshop:
python combine_merged_files.py
This script also adds the full taxonomy information (domain, phylum, class, order, family, genus) for each of the species that Bracken has identified. You can take a look at it using head bracken_out_merged/bracken_combined.csv if you like. Note that this uses a file that isn't usually an output from Kraken2/Bracken - I've put it together based on the NCBI taxonomy information (which can be found here for a browsable version or here for a downloadable version. It's not necessary for analysis of our samples, but I find it useful to have information on which e.g. family a given species belongs to and be able to collapse the species at higher ranks. It's at ~/CourseData/MIC_data/metagenome_data/tax_file_species.csv.
Now we're going to explore the results a bit in RStudio. We'll mainly be using Phyloseq, which is a popular package for microbiome data analysis as once you've got your data into the correct format for it, it has lots of really useful functions that you can use for simple visualisation and exploration of your data. The initial steps of getting your data into the correct format for it can be a bit fiddly, but it's really useful and easy to use once you've performed these.
Launch RStudio server and type in your username and password.
First of all, we'll import the packages that we'll be using:
library(phyloseq)
library(vegan)
library(ggplot2)
library(randomcoloR)
library(gridExtra)
library(tidyr)
Next we'll read in the file that contains our metadata and we'll also set the row names to be the SampleID and then remove the first column (so we don't have the row names duplicated):
metadata = read.csv('workspace/metagenome_workshop/Blueberry_metadata_metagenome.tsv', sep='\t')
rownames(metadata) = metadata$SampleID
metadata = metadata[,-1]
Next we'll read in the bracken output. We'll then separate out the column in this file that contains taxonomy information from the columns containing information about the abundance of each species in our samples.
bracken = read.csv('workspace/metagenome_workshop/bracken_out_merged/bracken_combined.csv')
bracken = as.data.frame(bracken)
row.names(bracken) = bracken$name
taxonomy = bracken[, c(1,50)]
row.names(taxonomy) = row.names(bracken)
table_num = data.matrix(bracken[,2:49])
rownames(table_num) = bracken[,1]
bracken = as.matrix(table_num)
taxonomy <- separate(data = taxonomy, col = Taxonomy, into = c("Domain", "Phylum", "Class", "Order", "Family", "Genus", "Species"), sep = "\\;")
taxmat <- taxonomy[,-1]
taxonomy = tax_table(taxmat)
taxa_names(taxonomy) <- rownames(taxmat)
Now we'll convert the bracken output, metadata and taxonomy information to a phyloseq object:
physeq = phyloseq(otu_table(bracken, taxa_are_rows = TRUE), sample_data(metadata), taxonomy)
Now we have our data imported to the phyloseq object (named "physeq") and from here we'll just be using this object.
First we'll take a look at the number of sequences within each sample have been classified using the different database and confidence threshold options:
sums = as.data.frame(sample_sums(physeq))
sums[,'Database'] = sample_data(physeq)$Database
sums[,'Confidence.Threshold'] = sample_data(physeq)$Confidence.Threshold
colnames(sums) = c('Sum', 'Database', 'Confidence.Threshold')
sums$Confidence.Threshold <- as.factor(sums$Confidence.Threshold)
ggplot(sums, aes(x=Confidence.Threshold, y=Sum, fill=Database)) + geom_boxplot() + scale_y_log10() + labs(y= "Number of reads classified", x = "Confidence Threshold")
Question:
Now we'll just reduce the phyloseq object to look at the full database and we'll also perform the normalisations that we will want to use:
db = "RefSeqV214"
conf = 0.1
physeq_red <- prune_samples(sample_data(physeq)$Database == db, physeq) #keep only samples where the database is "RefSeqV214"
physeq_red <- prune_samples(sample_data(physeq_red)$Confidence.Threshold == conf, physeq_red) #keep only samples where the confidence threshold is 0.1
physeq_rare <- rarefy_even_depth(physeq_red, sample.size = min(sample_sums(physeq_red)), replace = TRUE, trimOTUs = TRUE, verbose = TRUE) #rarefy to the lowest sample depth
physeq_relabun <- transform_sample_counts(physeq_red, function(x) (x / sum(x))*100) #convert to relative abundance
There are different opinions in the microbiome community about how samples should be normalised to account for biases in sequencing, but for simplicity we're not getting into that today. If you're interested and want to know more, you can find several papers linked in the microbiome for beginners page.
We will often use something like a stacked bar plot to get a quick overview of the data. Here we'll use the relative abundance phyloseq object to get a quick overview of how the community is composed.
First we'll look at the domain (Bacteria/Archaea/Eukaryotes/Viruses) level:
palette = distinctColorPalette(30)
rnk = "ta1"
ps.rank = tax_glom(physeq_relabun, taxrank=rnk, NArm=FALSE)
plot_bar(ps.rank, fill=rnk) + facet_wrap(c(~Description_1, ~Description_3), scales="free_x", nrow=1) + theme(legend.text=element_text(size=5), legend.key.size = unit(0.3, "cm")) + guides(fill=guide_legend(ncol=1)) + scale_fill_manual(values=palette)
The first line here defines the colour palette that we want to use (and that we want it to have 30 distinct colours), the second line groups our phyloseq object to the domain level (called "ta1" here) and then the third line is used for plotting the stacked barplot. You can go ahead and run just parts of this line to see how each part of the code changes the plotted graph, e.g. plot_bar(ps.domain, fill="ta1"), plot_bar(ps.domain, fill="ta1") + facet_wrap(c(~Description_1, ~Description_3), scales="free_x", nrow=1), etc.
Question 4: Here you should see that there are also Eukaryotes in your samples. What do you notice about the distribution of the Eukaryotes in different samples?
Now we'll look at the phylum level:
palette = distinctColorPalette(30)
rnk = "ta2"
ps.rank = tax_glom(physeq_relabun, taxrank=rnk, NArm=FALSE)
rank.sum = tapply(taxa_sums(ps.rank), tax_table(ps.rank)[, rnk], sum, na.rm=TRUE)
top30 = names(sort(rank.sum, TRUE))[1:30]
ps.rank = prune_taxa((tax_table(ps.rank)[, rnk] %in% top30), ps.rank)
plot_bar(ps.rank, fill=rnk) + facet_wrap(c(~Description_1, ~Description_3), scales="free_x", nrow=1) + theme(legend.text=element_text(size=5), legend.key.size = unit(0.3, "cm")) + guides(fill=guide_legend(ncol=1)) + scale_fill_manual(values=palette)
Here we're doing the same as above, but we're doing this at the rank of "ta3" rather than "ta1", and because we now have more than just three taxa at this rank, we're first filtering our table to include only the 30 most abundant taxa. So the line starting with rank.sum is first calculating the sum of each phylum across all samples, the top30 line is sorting these sums to find out which the top 30 most abundant phyla are and then the ps.phylum = prune_taxa line is filtering the ps.phylum object to include only those top 30 most abundant taxa before we plot them.
Question 5: Can you modify this phylum level code to work at a lower rank? Hint: You will need to modify the ta2 part
Now we'll have a look at some measures of alpha diversity in our samples. We're going to be looking at Richness (observed taxa), Chao1 richness (estimated richness) and Simpson's diversity (a measure of diversity which takes into account the number of species present, as well as the relative abundance of each species). The diversity measures can't be calculated on numbers that aren't integers, so we can't calculate these for the relative abundance data. We also don't have a tree for the metagenomic data so we can't use Faith's phylogenetic diversity.
Question 6: Why do we not usually have a phylogenetic tree for read-based metagenomic analyses?
First we'll plot alpha diversity individually for each sample:
plot_richness(physeq_rare, measures=c("Observed", "Chao1", "Simpson", "Shannon"))
Here there are other alpha diversity metrics that we could look at, but we're just focusing on these 3 that give a good overview of what our samples are like.
And now we'll take a look at the differences in alpha diversity between the groups.
Per group (bulk vs rhizosphere):
plot_richness(physeq_rare, x="Description_1", measures=c("Observed", "Chao1", "Simpson", "Shannon")) + geom_boxplot()
Per group (forest vs managed):
plot_richness(physeq_rare, x="Description_3", measures=c("Observed", "Chao1", "Simpson", "Shannon")) + geom_boxplot()
Question 7: What patterns do you notice with the alpha diversity between groups?
As you heard earlier, there are a lot of different beta diversity metrics that we could use, but we'll just take a look at two of them; Bray-Curtis dissimilarity (which takes into account the relative abundance of taxa) and Jaccard distance (which accounts only for the presence/absence of taxa). Here we're also using the adonis2 function to perform PERMANOVA tests. These tell us about any significant differences between groups.
Bray-Curtis dissimilarity:
ps = physeq_rare
ps.ord <- ordinate(ps, "PCoA", "bray")
plot_ordination(ps, ps.ord, type="samples", color="Description_1", shape="Description_3")
distance <- phyloseq::distance(ps, method="bray", weighted=F)
adonis2(distance ~ sample_data(ps)$Description_1*sample_data(ps)$Description_3)
Here the lines are: 1) creating a copy of the physeq_rare object, 2) creating an ordination of this object, telling the function that we want to use the PCoA ordination method with the bray (short for Bray-Curtis dissimilarity) method, 3) plotting this ordination, using Description_1 to colour them and Description_3 for the shape of the points, 4) calculating a distance matrix with the bray method, and 5) performing a statistical test using the adonis2 function (PERMANOVA test) using Description_1 and Description_3 in the metadata.
Question 8: What can you tell about the samples from how they group on the PCoA plots? Does this agree with the results of the PERMANOVA tests?
Jaccard distance:
ps = physeq_rare
ps.ord <- ordinate(ps, "PCoA", "jaccard")
plot_ordination(ps, ps.ord, type="samples", color="Description_1", shape="Description_3")
distance <- phyloseq::distance(ps, method="jaccard", weighted=F)
adonis2(distance ~ sample_data(ps)$Description_1*sample_data(ps)$Description_3)
Here we're doing exactly the same as above, but with Jaccard distance rather than Bray-Curtis dissimilarity.
Question 9: How do these results compare with those for Bray-Curtis dissimilarity? What does this tell you about the abundances of different taxa?
- Please feel free to post a question on the Microbiome Helper google group if you have any issues.
- General comments or inquires about Microbiome Helper can be sent to [email protected].