1887

Microbial Genomics logo

Volume 9, Issue 8

Results of the 2020 Genomic Proficiency Test for the network of European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance assessing whole-genome-sequencing capacities Open Access

This article is part of the Implementation of Genomics in Clinical and Public Health Microbiology collection

Abstract

The global surveillance and outbreak investigation of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is amidst a paradigm shift from traditional biology to bioinformatics. This is due to developments in whole-genome-sequencing (WGS) technologies, bioinformatics tools, and reduced costs. The increased use of WGS is accompanied by challenges such as standardization, quality control (QC), and data sharing. Thus, there is global need for inter-laboratory WGS proficiency test (PT) schemes to evaluate laboratories' capacity to produce reliable genomic data. Here, we present the results of the first iteration of the Genomic PT (GPT) organized by the Global Capacity Building Group at the Technical University of Denmark in 2020. Participating laboratories sequenced two isolates and corresponding DNA of , and , using WGS methodologies routinely employed at their laboratories. The participants' ability to obtain consistently good-quality WGS data was assessed based on several QC WGS metrics. A total of 21 laboratories from 21 European countries submitted WGS and meta-data. Most delivered high-quality sequence data with only two laboratories identified as overall underperforming. The QC metrics, N50 and number of contigs, were identified as good indicators for high-sequencing quality. We propose QC thresholds for N50 greater than 20 000 and 25 000 for and respectively, and number of contigs >200 bp greater than 225, 265 and 100 for , and , respectively. The GPT2020 results confirm the importance of systematic QC procedures, ensuring the submission of reliable WGS data for surveillance and outbreak investigation to meet the requirements of the paradigm shift in methodology.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): Genomic Proficiency Test , Pathogenic bacteria , Quality control , Short-read sequencing , Statistical comparison and Whole Genome Sequencing
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • The Fleming Fund, UK aid, Department for health and social care (Award Regional Grant, Round 1, 2.8 Whole Genome Sequencing)
    • Principle Award Recipient: NotApplicable
  • European Commission (Award Appointed European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial resistance (EURL-AR))
    • Principle Award Recipient: NotApplicable
© 2023 The Authors
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001076
2023-08-01
2024-05-01
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/mgen/9/8/mgen001076.html?itemId=/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001076&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Fraser CM, Gocayne JD, White O, Adams MD, Clayton RA et al. The minimal gene complement of Mycoplasma genitalium. Science 1995; 270:397–403 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Hutchison CA, Peterson SN, Gill SR, Cline RT, White O et al. Global transposon mutagenesis and a minimal Mycoplasma genome. Science 1999; 286:2165–2169 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Didelot X, Bowden R, Wilson DJ, Peto TEA, Crook DW. Transforming clinical microbiology with bacterial genome sequencing. Nat Rev Genet 2012; 13:601–612 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Fricke WF, Rasko DA. Bacterial genome sequencing in the clinic: bioinformatic challenges and solutions. Nat Rev Genet 2014; 15:49–55 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Köser CU, Ellington MJ, Cartwright EJP, Gillespie SH, Brown NM et al. Routine use of microbial whole genome sequencing in diagnostic and public health microbiology. PLoS Pathog 2012; 8:e1002824 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. WHO Whole genome sequencing for foodborne disease surveillance: landscape paper; 2018 https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/789241513869
  7. Larsen MV, Joensen KG, Zankari E, Ahrenfeldt J, Lukjancenko O et al. The CGE tool box. In den Bakker HC, Hendriksen RS, Xiangyu D. eds Applied Genomics of Foodborne Pathogens Springer; 2017 pp 65–90 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Moran-Gilad J, Sintchenko V, Pedersen SK, Wolfgang WJ, Pettengill J et al. Proficiency testing for bacterial whole genome sequencing: an end-user survey of current capabilities, requirements and priorities. BMC Infect Dis 2015; 15:174 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Pasquali F, Do Valle I, Palma F, Remondini D, Manfreda G et al. Application of different DNA extraction procedures, library preparation protocols and sequencing platforms: impact on sequencing results. Heliyon 2019; 5:e02745 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Timme RE, Lafon PC, Balkey M, Adams JK, Wagner D et al. Gen-FS coordinated proficiency test data for genomic foodborne pathogen surveillance, 2017 and 2018 exercises. Sci Data 2020; 7:402 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Larsen MV, Cosentino S, Rasmussen S, Friis C, Hasman H et al. Multilocus sequence typing of total-genome-sequenced bacteria. J Clin Microbiol 2012; 50:1355–1361 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Prjibelski A, Antipov D, Meleshko D, Lapidus A, Korobeynikov A. Using SPAdes de novo assembler. Curr Protoc Bioinformatics 2020; 70:e102 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Li H, Durbin R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 2009; 25:1754–1760 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, Fennell T, Ruan J et al. The sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 2009; 25:2078–2079 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Kaas RS, Leekitcharoenphon P, Aarestrup FM, Lund O. Solving the problem of comparing whole bacterial genomes across different sequencing platforms. PLoS One 2014; 9:e104984 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Wood DE, Lu J, Langmead B. Improved metagenomic analysis with Kraken 2. Genome Biol 2019; 20:257 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Schirmer M, Ijaz UZ, D’Amore R, Hall N, Sloan WT et al. Insight into biases and sequencing errors for amplicon sequencing with the Illumina MiSeq platform. Nucleic Acids Res 2015; 43:e37 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories; 2017 https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html
  19. Haendiges J, Jinneman K, Gonzalez-Escalona N. Choice of library preparation affects sequence quality, genome assembly, and precise in silico prediction of virulence genes in shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0242294 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Segerman B, Ástvaldsson Á, Mustafa L, Skarin J, Skarin H. The efficiency of Nextera XT tagmentation depends on G and C bases in the binding motif leading to uneven coverage in bacterial species with low and neutral GC-content. Front Microbiol 2022; 13:944770 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Timme RE, Rand H, Sanchez Leon M, Hoffmann M, Strain E et al. GenomeTrakr proficiency testing for foodborne pathogen surveillance: an exercise from 2015. Microb Genom 2018; 4:e000185 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kivisaar M. Mutation and recombination rates vary across bacterial chromosome. Microorganisms 2020; 8:25 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 23418:2022 Microbiology of the food chain - Whole genome sequencing for typing and genomic characterization of bacteria - General requirements and guidance; 2022 https://www.iso.org/standard/75509.html
  24. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) EFSA statement on the requirements for whole genome sequence analysis of microorganisms intentionally used in the food chain. EFSA J 2021; 19: [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Ellington MJ, Ekelund O, Aarestrup FM, Canton R, Doumith M et al. The role of whole genome sequencing in antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacteria: report from the EUCAST Subcommittee. Clin Microbiol Infect 2017; 23:2–22 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Stellato B, Van Parys BPG, Goulart PJ. Multivariate chebyshev inequality with estimated mean and variance. Am Stat 2017; 71:123–127 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Ronco T, Karlsmose Pedersen S, Hendriksen RS. The 28th EURL-AR Proficiency Test Escherichia Coli, Salmonella and Campylobacter DTU Food; 2021
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001076
Loading
Results of the 2020 Genomic Proficiency Test for the network of European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance assessing whole-genome-sequencing capacities
M Gen 9, 001076 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1099/mgen.0.001076
/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001076
/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001076
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Supplementary material 2

EXCEL

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error