![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Background
Over 700 bacterial species reside in human oral cavity, many of which are associated with local or distant site infections. Extensive characterization of the oral microbiome depends on the technologies used to determine the presence and proportions of specific bacterial species in various oral sites.
Objective
The objective of this study was to compare the microbial composition of dental plaque at baseline using Human Oral Microbe Identification Microarray (HOMIM) and Human Oral Microbe Identification using Next Generation Sequencing (HOMINGS) technologies, which are based on 16S rRNA.
Methods
Dental plaque samples were collected from 96 patients at baseline prior to a dental procedure involving manipulation of gingival tissues. The samples were surveyed for 293 and 597 oral bacterial species via HOMIM and HOMINGS, respectively, based on 16S rRNA gene sequences. We determined the concordance between the two technologies for common species. Genus level analysis was performed using HOMINGS-specific genus identification capabilities.
Results
HOMINGS detected twice the number of species in the same dental plaque samples compared to HOMIM. For the species detected by both HOMIM and HOMINGS, there was no difference in relative proportions of overall bacterial composition at the species, genus or phylum levels. Additionally, there was no difference in relative proportion for total species per patient between the two technologies.
Conclusion
HOMINGS significantly expanded oral bacterial species identification compared to HOMIM. The genus and species probes, combined in HOMINGS, provided a more comprehensive representation of oral bacterial community, critical for future characterization of oral microbes in distant site infections.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research/National Institute of Health grants # R01 DE13559-01, R01 DE021565, and Carolinas HealthCare System (CHS) Research Fund. We thank the residents and clinical coordinators at CMC Dental Clinic for sample collection, Megan Templin for her help in statistical analysis, and P. Hanjra for her help with the database.
