Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 13, 2025

Metagenomic Analysis of Silage
Published on: January 13, 2017
Evaluating metagenomics tools for genome binning with real metagenomic datasets and CAMI datasets
Yi Yue1,2,3, Hao Huang4,5,6, Zhao Qi4,7
1Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Veterinary Pathobiology and Disease Control, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei, 230036, China. yyyue@ahau.edu.cn.
Background:
Shotgun metagenomics based on untargeted sequencing can explore the taxonomic profile and the function of unknown microorganisms in samples, and complement the shortage of amplicon sequencing. Binning assembled sequences into individual groups, which represent microbial genomes, is the key step and a major challenge in metagenomic research. Both supervised and unsupervised machine learning methods have been employed in binning. Genome binning belonging to unsupervised method clusters contigs into individual genome bins by machine learning methods without the assistance of any reference databases. So far a lot of genome binning tools have emerged. Evaluating these genome tools is of great significance to microbiological research. In this study, we evaluate 15 genome binning tools containing 12 original binning tools and 3 refining binning tools by comparing the performance of these tools on chicken gut metagenomic datasets and the first CAMI challenge datasets.
Results:
For chicken gut metagenomic datasets, original genome binner MetaBat, Groopm2 and Autometa performed better than other original binner, and MetaWrap combined the binning results of them generated the most high-quality genome bins. For CAMI datasets, Groopm2 achieved the highest purity (> 0.9) with good completeness (> 0.8), and reconstructed the most high-quality genome bins among original genome binners. Compared with Groopm2, MetaBat2 had similar performance with higher completeness and lower purity. Genome refining binners DASTool predicated the most high-quality genome bins among all genomes binners. Most genome binner performed well for unique strains. Nonetheless, reconstructing common strains still is a substantial challenge for all genome binner.
Conclusions:
In conclusion, we tested a set of currently available, state-of-the-art metagenomics hybrid binning tools and provided a guide for selecting tools for metagenomic binning by comparing range of purity, completeness, adjusted rand index, and the number of high-quality reconstructed bins. Furthermore, available information for future binning strategy were concluded.
More Related Videos
09:06High-throughput Identification of Gene Regulatory Sequences Using Next-generation Sequencing of Circular Chromosome Conformation Capture 4C-seq
Published on: October 5, 2018
11:22Microbiota Analysis Using Two-step PCR and Next-generation 16S rRNA Gene Sequencing
Published on: October 15, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons
Modern Molecular Taxonomy
Genome Annotation and Assembly