Differential abundance (DA) analysis of microbiome data continues to be a challenging problem due to the complexity of the data. In this article we define the notion of “sampling fraction” and demonstrate a major hurdle in performing DA analysis of microbiome data is the bias introduced by differences in the sampling fractions across samples. We introduce a methodology called Analysis of Compositions of Microbiomes with Bias Correction (ANCOM-BC), which estimates the unknown sampling fractions and corrects the bias induced by their differences among samples. The absolute abundance data are modeled using a linear regression framework. This formulation makes a fundamental advancement in the field because, unlike the existing methods, it (a) provides statistically valid test with appropriate p-values, (b) provides confidence intervals for differential abundance of each taxon, (c) controls the False Discovery Rate (FDR), (d) maintains adequate power, and (e) is computationally simple to implement.
Data from 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) amplicon sequencing present challenges to ecological and statistical interpretation. In particular, library sizes often vary over several ranges of magnitude, and the data contains many zeros. Although we are typically interested in comparing relative abundance of taxa in the ecosystem of two or more groups, we can only measure the taxon relative abundance in specimens obtained from the ecosystems. Because the comparison of taxon relative abundance in the specimen is not equivalent to the comparison of taxon relative abundance in the ecosystems, this presents a special challenge. Second, because the relative abundance of taxa in the specimen (as well as in the ecosystem) sum to 1, these are compositional data. Because the compositional data are constrained by the simplex (sum to 1) and are not unconstrained in the Euclidean space, many standard methods of analysis are not applicable. Here, we evaluate how these challenges impact the performance of existing normalization methods and differential abundance analyses. Effects on normalization: Most normalization methods enable successful clustering of samples according to biological origin when the groups differ substantially in their overall microbial composition. Rarefying more clearly clusters samples according to biological origin than other normalization techniques do for ordination metrics based on presence or absence. Alternate normalization measures are potentially vulnerable to artifacts due to library size. Effects on differential abundance testing: We build on a previous work to evaluate seven proposed statistical methods using rarefied as well as raw data. Our simulation studies suggest that the false discovery rates of many differential abundance-testing methods are not increased by rarefying itself, although of course rarefying results in a loss of sensitivity due to elimination of a portion of available data. For groups with large (~10×) differences in the average library size, rarefying lowers the false discovery rate. DESeq2, without addition of a constant, increased sensitivity on smaller datasets (20 samples per group) but also critically the only method tested that has a good control of false discovery rate. These findings guide which normalization and differential abundance techniques to use based on the data characteristics of a given study.
29 May 2015 in Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease
Understanding the factors regulating our microbiota is important but requires appropriate statistical methodology. When comparing two or more populations most existing approaches either discount the underlying compositional structure in the microbiome data or use probability models such as the multinomial and Dirichlet-multinomial distributions, which may impose a correlation structure not suitable for microbiome data. To develop a methodology that accounts for compositional constraints to reduce false discoveries in detecting differentially abundant taxa at an ecosystem level, while maintaining high statistical power. We introduced a novel statistical framework called analysis of composition of microbiomes (ANCOM). ANCOM accounts for the underlying structure in the data and can be used for comparing the composition of microbiomes in two or more populations. ANCOM makes no distributional assumptions and can be implemented in a linear model framework to adjust for covariates as well as model longitudinal data. ANCOM also scales well to compare samples involving thousands of taxa. We compared the performance of ANCOM to the standard t-test and a recently published methodology called Zero Inflated Gaussian (ZIG) methodology (1) for drawing inferences on the mean taxa abundance in two or more populations. ANCOM controlled the false discovery rate (FDR) at the desired nominal level while also improving power, whereas the t-test and ZIG had inflated FDRs, in some instances as high as 68% for the t-test and 60% for ZIG. We illustrate the performance of ANCOM using two publicly available microbial datasets in the human gut, demonstrating its general applicability to testing hypotheses about compositional differences in microbial communities. Accounting for compositionality using log-ratio analysis results in significantly improved inference in microbiota survey data.
We show that a citizen science, self-selected cohort shipping samples through the mail at room temperature recaptures many known microbiome results from clinically collected cohorts and reveals new ones. Of particular interest is integratingn= 1 study data with the population data, showing that the extent of microbiome change after events such as surgery can exceed differences between distinct environmental biomes, and the effect of diverse plants in the diet, which we confirm with untargeted metabolomics on hundreds of samples.
Microbiome differential abundance analysis methods for two groups are well-established in the literature. However, many microbiome studies involve more than two groups, sometimes even ordered groups such as stages of a disease, and require different types of comparison. Standard pairwise comparisons are inefficient in terms of power and false discovery rates. In this Article, we propose a general framework, ANCOM-BC2, for performing a wide range of multigroup analyses with covariate adjustments and repeated measures. We illustrate our methodology through two real datasets. The first example explores the effects of aridity on the soil microbiome, and the second example investigates the effects of surgical interventions on the microbiome of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.