Back

DNA extraction and virome processing methods strongly influence recovered human gut viral community characteristics

Hillary, L. S.; Knotts, T. A.; Adams, S. H.; Ali, M. R.; Olm, M. R.; Emerson, J. B.

2025-11-26 microbiology
10.1101/2025.11.25.690293 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Accurately characterising the human gut virome is critical to understanding virus-microbiome-host interactions. However, widely used methods introduce biases that complicate data interpretation and limit cross-study comparability. For instance, multiple-displacement amplification (MDA) preferentially amplifies single-stranded DNA viruses, while total metagenomes are dominated by non-viral sequences, reducing viral signal. These traditional methods have not been systematically compared to viral size-fraction metagenomes (viromes) prepared without MDA. To address this, we applied four common methods for characterising human gut viral community composition (total metagenomes, viromes with/ without DNase treatment (to remove free DNA), and MDA viromes) to a human stool sample, with technical triplicates for each approach. MDA biased viral community composition to a shocking degree: Microviridae formed [~]90% of MDA viromes compared to just 2% of non-MDA viromes. Removing ssDNA viruses from data analyses substantially reduced, but did not eliminate, MDA bias. Metagenomes were enriched for putative temperate phages and predicted Bacillota-phages, whereas predicted Bacteroidetes-phages dominated all viromes, suggesting that metagenomes and viromes select for different populations within the total viral community. DNase treatment had little-to-no effect on virome richness or community composition. This proof-of-principle experiment demonstrates that preparatory methods for viral community analysis can lead to substantially different conclusions from the same faecal sample, and we provide a comprehensive omic data analysis framework for comparing laboratory methodologies for viral ecology. With sufficient DNA yields now easily achievable from human gut viromes without the use of MDA, our results suggest that this biased amplification method should be avoided in human gut virome studies. O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=112 SRC="FIGDIR/small/690293v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (35K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@36252org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@2c06f0org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@7b7cceorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@13ec804_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG O_FLOATNOGraphical AbstractC_FLOATNO C_FIG

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Microbiome
139 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
33.4%
2
mSystems
361 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
10.2%
3
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
10.2%
50% of probability mass above
4
ISME Communications
103 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.6%
5
mBio
750 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.1%
6
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 45%
2.5%
7
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
8
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
9
Journal of Virology
456 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
10
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
11
Nature Microbiology
133 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
12
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 47%
1.3%
13
Gut Microbes
70 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
14
Genome Biology
555 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
15
Cell
370 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.3%
16
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 60%
1.2%
17
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 69%
1.0%
18
The ISME Journal
194 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
19
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
20
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
21
npj Biofilms and Microbiomes
56 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
Journal of Visualized Experiments
30 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
23
Virus Evolution
140 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
24
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
25
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 15%
0.8%
26
Nature Biotechnology
147 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
27
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 25%
0.7%
28
BMC Microbiology
35 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
30
MicrobiologyOpen
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%