This week, BIE group was at two conferences in 🇩🇰: @neftalyl and @RStannius presented their @cemist_dtu projects at the DMS 2022 congress, while @Xinming_Xu, @AdelePioppi, and @CajaDinesen discussed their CSC and #NNF_INTERACT projects at #PlantMicrobeInteractions2022

Great table companionship yesterday night at #PlantMicrobeInteractions2022 about wine, photography, science careers, and life stories…

Thank you, @SessitschAngela, Jos Raaijmakers, @EAlexandersson (#WineExpert), @RameshVetukuri, and @TonniGrube

Amy Grunden (from @NCState) concludes the scientific part of #PlantMicrobeInteractions2022

That’s it, Folks!
#SlaapLekker

Lotte highlights that indeed, they found new, fungal BGCs in the samples from @VCarryOn1 et al story above
➡️ application on metagenomes for visualizing eukaryotic BGCs

#PlantMicrobeInteractions2022

Also, need to separate pro- and eukaryote metagenome

Lotte introduces “Whokaryotes”, published in Microbial Genomics @MicrobioSoc 👇🏼
https://www.microbiologyresearch.org/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.000823

#PlantMicrobeInteractions2022

Whokaryote: distinguishing eukaryotic and prokaryotic contigs in metagenomes based on gene structure | Microbiology Society

Metagenomics has become a prominent technology to study the functional potential of all organisms in a microbial community. Most studies focus on the bacterial content of these communities, while ignoring eukaryotic microbes. Indeed, many metagenomics analysis pipelines silently assume that all contigs in a metagenome are prokaryotic, likely resulting in less accurate annotation of eukaryotes in metagenomes. Early detection of eukaryotic contigs allows for eukaryote-specific gene prediction and functional annotation. Here, we developed a classifier that distinguishes eukaryotic from prokaryotic contigs based on foundational differences between these taxa in terms of gene structure. We first developed Whokaryote, a random forest classifier that uses intergenic distance, gene density and gene length as the most important features. We show that, with an estimated recall, precision and accuracy of 94, 96 and 95 %, respectively, this classifier with features grounded in biology can perform almost as well as the classifiers EukRep and Tiara, which use k-mer frequencies as features. By retraining our classifier with Tiara predictions as an additional feature, the weaknesses of both types of classifiers are compensated; the result is Whokaryote+Tiara, an enhanced classifier that outperforms all individual classifiers, with an F1 score of 0.99 for both eukaryotes and prokaryotes, while still being fast. In a reanalysis of metagenome data from a disease-suppressive plant endospheric microbial community, we show how using Whokaryote+Tiara to select contigs for eukaryotic gene prediction facilitates the discovery of several biosynthetic gene clusters that were missed in the original study. Whokaryote (+Tiara) is wrapped in an easily installable package and is freely available from https://github.com/LottePronk/whokaryote.

However, do we miss the eukaryotic share of BGCs in metagenomes❓
Most tools focus on prokaryotes ▶️ need to adapt pipelines for eukaryotes, e.g. introns in eukaryotes, different gene density

#PlantMicrobeInteractions2022

Lotte highlights antiSMASH and its usefulness to identify BGCs, even in metagenomes

Example used here: @VCarryOn1 et al in @ScienceMagazine on how to identify BGCs in metagenomes and meta transcriptomes ➡️over 700 BGCs
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaw9285

#PlantMicrobeInteractions2022

Lotte Pronk @PronkLotte (from @marnixmedema group at @WUR) on finding prokaryotic and eukaryotic biosynthetic gene clusters in metagenomes
#PlantMicrobeInteractions2022

Manuel on Roberto Kolter’s 7 members SynCom (assembled based on maize endophytes) in vitro and on plant proteomics, including general response of certain SynCom members to plant root colonization

#PlantMicrobeInteractions2022