Summary of the 2011 “Microbiomes of built environments symposium”

Good to see this summary come out: Microbiomes of built environments: 2011 symposium highlights and workgroup recommendations – Corsi – 2012 – Indoor Air – Wiley Online Library.

Even better that it freely available, though I am a bit dubious of the Wiley Open Access Option as applied by this journal since on the PDF there are comments like “All rights reserved” and “Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S”.  And when I used the quick tool to calculate reuse costs, they were quite high.  Bummer.

 

 

Posted in Journal club | Leave a comment

Building Science at the American Institute of Architects convention

Of relevance to microBEnet: National Institute of Building Sciences Event Announcement – AIA National Convention Programs Highlight Building Science.

The meeting is next week (May 17-19 in DC).  Not sure how much online presence the meeting will have but will try to post any details I can come up with.

www.nibs.com

Posted in Conference Announcements | Tagged , | Leave a comment

GSC13: From Genomes to Interactions to Communities to Models

The Genomic Standards Consortium recently held its 13th Workshop from March 5-7 in Shenzhen, China, where advances in genomics research were discussed in close proximity to the massive sequencing power of BGI. As a workshop participant, I found the meeting presentations to be both informative and exciting; the data spoke for itself, and many projects outlined significant biological findings. Here I provide an overview of the workshop proceedings, as interpreted from the audience.

Shenzhen, China - an oceanfront hub for genomics

The meeting’s theme–”From Genomes to Interactions to Communities to Models”–encapsulated the evolving landscape of high-throughput sequencing projects, highlighting a fundamental shift from baseline data generation towards integrated biological analyses and predictive modeling approaches. The scope of the meeting was comprehensive–session topics ranged from behemoth model organisms (rice genomics) to poorly characterized viral taxa, and the agenda also included a session focused on the Microbiology of the Built Environment. A detailed program is archived on the GSC website, with SciVee video uploads for many of the speaker presentations.

Under the banner of the GSC, common links were highlighted between seemingly discrete projects, in the form of metadata and reporting standards driven by GSC efforts. Speakers noted that an emphasis on rich accompanying metadata will fundamentally expand the reach and utility of ongoing megasequencing projects, promoting community interactions, comparative studies and the dissemination of research products across the wider scientific community.

In addition to data standards, some common topics were echoed across GSC presentations: key insights equally applicable to (and often plaguing) diverse research areas.

Critical Knowledge Gaps Remain

Rita Colwell provided a succinct overview of the most pressing “Elephants in the Room”: research areas which will require focused community efforts, now that the initial frenzy of high-throughput sequencing approaches have grown and transitioned into a maturing field. When 454 and Illumina platforms were brand new to the market, exploratory sequencing approaches could easily suffice; any data, regardless of sampling or sequencing methodology, provided stunning and novel insights. As the scientific community becomes somewhat desensitized to the data deluge, we must begin to think carefully about the resulting impacts of study design and execution. At GSC13 Colwell urged the genomics community to focus on four key areas:

Rita Colwell speaking at GSC13

Sampling procedures. Colwell noted that we are currently looking at a “Teaspoon in the Ocean” in terms of data analyzed versus the scale of global biodiversity. For genomic studies, sample design must come to match the thorough methodology followed by classical ecology studies. Researchers must think about sampling across space and time, carefully planning how much material to collect, what sample volume is required to address questions at hand, and determining the appropriate number of technical and biological replicates.

DNA extractions. The variation introduced from different DNA extraction methods has not been fully investigated. Colwell noted that the composition of environmental DNA preps (even if you take a rigorous approach) might not give you a complete, or even accurate picture of community assemblages. In the end, there may be no “perfect” way to handle samples; some bias is inherent to any approach. However, understanding the nature of this introduced bias will at least enable researchers to adjust analyses for accurate biological interpretations. Extrapolation is better than no information at all.

Sequencing. Colwell also stressed that variability across sequencing runs has not been adequately addressed; there can be machine, operator, and inter-lab error. Metrics such as standard deviations must be pursued for quantifying variance across sequencing runs.

Data Banking. In genomic approaches, the current focus continues to fall on informatics. Computational biology is the most exciting approach to data and represents the cutting edge of research. However, Colwell noted that while we are fixated by informatics we are failing to devote equal energy to data storage. Data banking is a pressing concern, but who will pay for it? Colwell suggested that perhaps we should consider banking source material instead of sequence data, as this might represent a less expensive approach in the long run.

GSC13 participants tour BGI's facilities in Shenzhen

Progress and Future Directions

Aside from community challenges, GSC13 speakers relayed the status of ongoing projects and defined future research priorities. Three obvious themes emerged from the context of existing initiatives:

Project scopes shift towards ‘megagenomics’. The increasingly grand scale of new sequencing projects was immediately apparent at GSC13. Research efforts are now focusing on “megasequencing projects”: comparative (meta)genomics incorporating thousands or tens of thousands of samples, harnessing deep sequencing efforts to generate trillions of base pairs using increasingly higher-throughput sequencing platforms. Metadata, adherence to reporting standards and data curation represent important components to these projects; close coordination with GSC efforts look set to establish precedents for such large-scale initiatives, providing robust models and design templates for future sequencing projects.

Lack of Reference Genomes Hinders Biological Analysis. Speaker after speaker aired a common woe: regardless of ecosystem, analyses of environmental sequences are consistently and significantly impacted by the lack of available reference data. Reference genomes are critical for training bioinformatic algorithms and populating comparative database resources for assigning taxonomy to unknown sequences. Patchy, sparsely populated reference databases can significantly reduce the accuracy of taxonomic or functional assignments (and even commonly preclude any assignments whatsoever). Given this ongoing challenge, GSC13 highlighted some community efforts to increase the availability of reference genome data. Jun Wang explained BGI’s commitment to produce a digital library of reference genomes, with initial plans to sequence 1000 plant and animal species. The TARA oceans project is making similar inroads, aiming to build up reference databases for uncultured marine eukaryotes through single-cell genomics approaches.

The Evolution of Database Resources. A significant number of talks at GSC13 focused on databases resources. A key step towards conquering the ongoing data deluge is designing effective, community-driven database resources that provide easy access to sequence data and enable large-scale comparative analyses. Speakers noted that database resources are not perfect, but that administrators are well aware of the challenges and priorities for designing effective portals. The need for intuitive, efficient database tools has become increasingly imperative as more projects are being undertaken at a grander and grander scale. GSC13 highlighted progress across diverse genomic database tools, from metagenome annotation in MG-RAST to comparative fungal genomics. Jason Stajich highlighted innovative features being incorporated into FungiDB, such as word clouds to find genes of interest, and promoting user interactions through community comment features.

Pulling up to the BGI facility in Shenzhen.

What does this mean for microBEnet?

Given the challenges and future directions outlined at GSC13, the burgeoning research network focused on Microbiology of the Built Environment appears well poised to progressively tackle the overarching themes outlined by the wider scientific community. Paula Olsiewski introduced the Sloan foundation’s perspective with the succinct phrase: “Do something early, that is catalytic.”, noting that the first step in Sloan’s approach is to identify important problems. The ongoing bottlenecks and steep hurdles that exist in high-throughput sequencing fields are arguably some of the most critical issues preventing forward progress in genomics. Yet, such widespread issues can be efficiently tacked by a coordinated community effort guided by central themes and core questions, such as those which underpin microBEnet. In understudied environments such as the Built Environment, the lack of reference genomes can severely hinder our capacity to understand microbial community structure and function. A dedicated push by microBEnet could aim towards establishing an effective long-term genomics resource for the Built Environment, akin to efforts to catalog typical microbiota in the Human Microbiome Project. The interdisciplinary nature of microBEnet can also accelerate the pace of progress through unique collaborations. Olsiewski urged the community to forge new, cross-discipline collaborations, hinting at transformative effects that may emerge from partnerships with facilities such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The GSC community has witnessed significant progress since its inception. However, each meeting provides a stark (yet optimistic) reminder that we are still working diligently to overcome many formidable challenges.

Posted in Meetings and Conference Reports | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Report of 13th Genomic Standards Consortium Meeting including microbiology of the built environment session

A meeting report from the 13th GSC meeting has been published. Report of the 13th Genomic Standards Consortium Meeting, Shenzhen, China, March 4–7, 2012. | Gilbert | Standards in Genomic Sciences.

The meeting including a session we at microBEnet sponsored on microbiology of the built environment.  More detail on the meeting will be coming here but this meeting report is a good place to start.

Posted in Meetings and Conference Reports | Leave a comment

Microbial “signs” with a potential application in sensing (arsenic in this case)

Fluorescent E. coli

Just a short post here about “art meets science”.  A project at UC San Diego has created “flashing bacterial signs” (also called “biopixels”) that synchronously flash on and off through controlled fluorescence.  Which is pretty cool by itself, and reminds me a bit of the stunt with the Contagion promo.  See the original paper here.

But where it gets much more interesting is the idea of using bacteria like this as biosensors in the built environment.  The idea is to use quorum sensing to synchronize enough bacteria to create a visual signal in response to a high level of some contaminant in the environment such as arsenic.   There are a number of potential advantages of using such a biological sensor including low-cost and the ability to continuously measure an environment over a long period of time.

Posted in News | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Guest Post: Paul Orwin from CSUSB on an undergraduate microbial genome sequencing project

A while back we posted about our microBEnet project to have undergraduates come into the lab and sequence reference genomes from the built environment.  That project now has it’s own blog, being maintained by the students themselves.   Comments about our original post led to the following guest post by Paul Orwin, who is doing something very similar at CSUSB.

Guest post by Paul Orwin, Associate Professor of Biology, CSU San Bernardino.

CSUSB students

The California State University at San Bernardino is a regional comprehensive university in the Inland Empire region of California (Riverside and San Bernardino Counties). It is one of only two (the other being UC Riverside) public universities serving this region.  As a master’s level school, we have a diverse student body from a lot of different educational and ethnic backgrounds.  Designing courses for this group of students is a challenge!  Fortunately, by the time they reach the upper division Biology courses, they have had a thorough grounding in biological sciences and chemistry.  This makes my task in putting together this course easier. Many of the students see themselves following a health professions route in the future, including Medical, Dental, and Pharmacy school as well as some interested in Ph.D. studies. So there is a lot of demand for a course in Medical Microbiology, but I wanted to spice things up a bit!  I decided that where I could do that was in the laboratory segment of the class, by including an enrichment and isolation experiment along with the traditional clinical microbiology diagnostic experiments.

I first need to explain where the idea for this course came from.  For several years I have been taking students from my lab group to the International Conference on Microbial Genomics held at Lake Arrowhead, CA every other year.  This is a fantastic meeting, organized by Jeffrey H. Miller (gotta be careful with those middle initials!) at UCLA.  In a not terribly surprising coincidence, Jonathan Eisen (who got me interested in microBEnet) and Ashlee Earl (who I don’t think has a web site) (who will appear later in this story) are involved in organizing it this year.  At this meeting I learned a great deal about genomics and metagenomics, and got interested in the idea of incorporating this type of work into the classroom based on the work Jeffrey Miller and Erin Sanders were doing with UCLA Microbiology undergraduates.  One year they reported on their efforts to sequence and annotate the genome of a novel microorganism and another time Erin’s class put up posters describing the phage they identified, sequenced, and annotated.  They wrote a textbook about this work, which goes to show they are dedicated to this idea! As we will see, I have not gotten nearly that far in my own efforts.  Another source of inspiration for this work was the class that Jared Leadbetter taught at CalTech when I was working with him, on enrichment and isolation strategies from the environment (including the Built Environment, incidentally).  The inventiveness of these students was remarkable, as was the frequency with which they were successful. Of course, he has forgotten more microbiology than I will ever know, which probably helps.  After I started my own faculty journey, I drew on this inspiration as well as many conversations in various forms with Mark Martin (a true microbial supremacist) to develop an enrichment and isolation approach for my general Microbiology course. Mark and Jared (and others) have inspired me to think about culture techniques, and about the claim that much of the microbiome is “unculturable” (preposterous, IMHO).

Human microbiome

The final person who got me interested in this is the aforementioned Dr. Ashlee Earl, who presented some work on the Human Microbiome Project at the last ASM general meeting. On her poster, she described how the HMP had identified a group of 100 most wanted organisms – organisms that they wanted other labs and research groups to isolate so that a good set of reference genomes could be developed.  This served as the jumping off point for my course design (if you can call it that).

Ok, the name dropping is out of the way (or the giving credit where credit is due, if you prefer), so on to the class itself.  It is a class in Medical Microbiology, with the lecture based on Mims’ Medical Microbiology.  The lab is based on enrichment and isolation techniques, bringing together classical clinical microbiology tests (metabolic testing, serotyping, and staining) with 16S rRNA sequence analysis for identification purposes. The idea here is to teach the students how to use these techniques for two major things a medical microbiologist might do – identify a known pathogen by rapid testing procedures, or identify and classify an unknown organism associated with a pathology.

The first half of the course (which we have just completed) involved identifying organisms from a mixed culture (given to the students by myself) based on traditional microbiological techniques.  This identification was complemented with a 16s rRNA experiment, which also served as an introduction/refresher on basic molecular biology techniques (PCR, gel electrophoresis, DNA extraction).  When the DNA sequences are returned to us from the sequencing facility, we will be analyzing them using the RDP database.  This will also give us a chance to discuss error in sequencing and PCR, as well as the difference between identifying and classifying.  Hopefully they get the same thing from the sequencing as they got from the culture tests!

We have spent a good deal of time discussing the idea of enrichment and isolation, and how this can be applied to the Human Microbiome.  They have seen the immense diversity of the microbiome (cite) as well as the difference between what is there and what is published.  To prepare them for the task, I used the HMP table that lists off the organisms identified from various body sites and categorizes them as “Most Wanted, Medium Priority, and Low Priority.”  I just gave the students the “Most Wanted” organisms to work with, and to make things a little more comfortable for them I eliminated the stool sample organisms.  I then proposed several options to them.

1)                Everyone could agree on a single target to isolate, and we could design a number of different media to try to enrich for and isolate these bacteria.

2)                Everyone could go their own way, picking individual organisms and designing experiments to enrich, isolate, and identify them.

CSUSB students

In the end, several students chose to go their own way, while a number chose to focus on one group (the oral actinomycetes) and come up with multiple different approaches to isolate these bacteria.  They all did background research on what is known about culturing these organisms from various sources, and we all agreed on using three of complementary strategies to enrich and isolate these bacteria.  The first approach is the traditional enrichment, based on known characteristics of the species, design media that encourage actinomycetes (like potato agar) to grow.  The second is to use the desiccation tolerance of the actinomycete spore as a strong selection against other vegetative cells (this is riskier, since there are endospore formers present as well, and we don’t know if the actinomycetes in the oral microbiota sporulate.  The final approach is my personal favorite – the oligotrophy approach.  First, put them on media with nothing in it (perhaps trace minerals).  Let micro colonies form on that plate, then pick the microcolonies onto separate “nothing medium” and let them grow in isolation.  Finally carefully pick them onto rich medium (or maybe just a bit richer medium, like 100 mg/L YE) to let them grow big enough to test.  If they grow well on rich medium, we can do biochemical tests, or we can just go with the molecular identification.  I can’t take credit for this idea (I first heard it from Jared), but I’ve used it a few times and I like it.  It helps find bacteria that don’t grow very fast on rich media, or get outcompeted by the boring old familiars on typical clinical microbiology medium.

So that’s where we are right now, with IRB approval in hand, ready to embark on the adventure.  I think it will work, and I’m sure that we will all learn something!  Sadly I am not enough of a tech geek (yet!) to have the students blogging or tweeting the experience.  Maybe next year…

Posted in Citizen science, Courses | 2 Comments

Guest Post: Metadata for the Built Environment – MIxS-BE package

This is a Guest Post from Lynn Schriml.

The MIxS-BE metadata package was presented on March 7, 2012, as part of the Microbiology of the Built Environment session sponsored by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation at GSC13 in Shenzhen, China.

The Sloan Foundation has established the Microbiology of the Built
Environment (BE) to uncover the complexity of microbial ecosystems of inside spaces. Bringing together researchers, architects and engineers, the Microbiome of the Built Environment Data Analysis Core (MoBeDAC, Folker Meyer PI) is developing and coordinating a cohesive representation of the microbial community in built environments. MoBeDAC (http://mobedac.org/) has established a working group, led by Elizabeth Glass and Lynn Schriml, to expand the GSC MIxS standard for microbial sequences collected from built environments.

The initial MIxS-BE metadata package represents a minimal metadata description of the built environment to be collected and reported for each sequenced sample. The MIxS-BE package includes core terms for surface material, humidity, temperature, moisture and occupancy type along with specific metadata terms describing the indoor air, building and sample properties. Samples collected, sequenced and annotated with MIxS-BE metatdata from waste-water, air filters, air and surfaces of indoor spaces provides a rigorous and structured tool for analysis of microbial sequences and ecosystems of the indoor and outdoor environments.

The MIxS-BE package is being expanded to comprise a full representation of all metadata describing the building, building materials, samples, building environment, and occupants.

GSC13 Built Environment Metadata Slides: BE_GSC13_schriml_v4

Metadata Spreadsheet: built_environment metadata terms v5

Posted in Meetings and Conference Reports | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Bacteria ‘munching’ on Titanic: converting metal into rust.

"rusticles" on the Titanic

Just a short post about bacteria literally converting the built environment into the natural environment.  There are numerous specialized bacteria currently eating the Titanic, including one called Halomonas titanicae.  They’re converting the steel and iron into rust and the whole thing may be gone in a few decades.

Bad news for history buffs, good news for all the other metal junk we toss in the ocean.

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

A bit over the top but critically important aspect of microbes in the built environment: space station

This article (Mutant space microbes attack ISS: Munch metal, may crack glass) has some issues (e.g., much of it is anecdotal and hard to tell how scientific or even robust much of the detailed are) but it is a very interesting example of the potential importance of microbes in the built environment.  You may not care about the microbes in your buildings (though you should) but I think people understand or can imagine how microbes on a space craft could have some big effects.  One thing is clear – I want access to these samples …

Posted in News | Leave a comment

Job Posting: Part-time online Research Assistant working on literature related to the microbiology of the built environment

Job posting for a part time, online only research assistant position helping to catalog information from the primary literature relating to the microbial ecology of the built environment.

Long description from Hal Levin, the contact person for this position:

“We’d like to find a student well along in their academic career (grad student or undergrad close to graduation) with a potentially strong interest in the microbiology of the built environment, particularly the indoor environment. (Our focus is primarily the indoor environment.) We would send selection publications from our collection of articles  to the student for reading, data culling, and data entry in the database. The ideal R.A. would be knowledgeable enough about microbiology to be comfortable identifying the relevant species and the indoor environmental factors associated with the presence, prevalence, and other characteristics of the identified microbes reported in each paper. The ideal student would have an interest in the subject of our inquiry that went beyond simply the microbiology. They would have an interest in the microbes as part of the ecology or ecosystem in buildings or on materials that are the sites or subjects of the papers we have collected.”

The details:

Duration: 6 months minimum, to 12 months maximum
Approximate Hours Per Week: 10 – 20
Salary Range: negotiated – hourly

Qualifications:
Candidates should have a strong interest in microbial ecology and knowledge of or willingness to learn database entry, specifically Microsoft Access.
Job Description:
Read articles on microbial ecology of the built environment and catalog information in the articles in a database. Information will include the micro-organisms identified and the characteristics of the environment where they were collected or sampled.
Additional Notes:

E-mail resume, and availability in terms of hours per week during school term and summer to contact below.

Contact Information:
Hal Levin
831 425 3946 (leave a message if nobody responds)
hlevin6@gmail.com

Posted in Job postings | Leave a comment