biologeco和dgge数据分析的新方法.doc

几种Biolog ECO和DGGE 数据分析方法的比较* 毛如志1，王文鹏1，李彬2，何霞红** （1.农业生物多样性研究中心，云南农业大学，云南 昆明 650201； 2.宣威市农业局农技推广中心，云南 宣威655400） 摘要：PCA常用于Biolog ECO和DGGE数据分析，但是该方法无法正确区分不同环境微生物的多样性结构，也无法实现微生物标记的发现。为实现该功能，本研究采用PCA、PLS-DA、PLS-EDA及PLS、OPLS方法对Biolog ECO和DGGE数据进行分析。结果表明： DGGE数据通过 PLS-EDA分析方法能区分不同环境微生物多样性的结构（PC1=16.8%）；采用PLS-DA分析方法，发现两个环境样品中有1个样品重合（PC1=33%）；PCA分析方法分离效果最差（PC1=27.1%）。Biolog ECO数据通过 PLS-EDA分析方法能区分不同环境微生物多样性的结构（PC1=25.5%）；PLS-DA分析方法有4个样品重合（PC1=36.3%）；PCA分析方法效果最差（PC1=35.1%）。Biolog ECO和DGGE数据进行PLS 和 OPLS分析方法筛选后，发现多个潜在的碳源及物种，可作为不同环境条件下微生物标记物。可见，PLS-EDA优于PLS-DA及PCA，是微生物研究的重要方法；PLS 和 OPLS 分析方法中 VIP≥1.00的条带和碳源可作为潜在的微生物标记。 关键词：Biolog ECO；DGGE；数据；PCA；PLS-DA；PLS-EDA；PLS；OPLS 中图分类号： S 154. 3 文献标志码：A 文章编号： comparison of several methods for Biolog ECO and DGGE datas analysis Mao Ruzhi1, Wang Wenpeng1, Li Bing2, He Xiahong1 The National Center for Agricultural Biodiversity, Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming 650201, China; 2. Bureau of Agriculture Agricultural Technology Promotion Center of Xuanwei City, Xuanwei 655400, China) Abstact: PCA was a normal method used for Biolog ECO and DGGE datas analysis.However,this method hardly distinguish soil microbial diversity structure and microbial markers in different environments. In this study, PCA, PLS-DA, PLS-EDA methods were used study microbial diversity structure in different environments. PLS, OPLS methods were used discovered microbial makers. The results show: PLS-EDA method completely separated microbial diversity structure in different environments（PC1=16.8%）, a sample can not completely separated by PLS-DA（PC1=33%）, but PCA was not good method to microbial diversity structure analysis for DGGE datas. PLS-EDA completely separated microbial diversity structure different environments（PC1=25.5%）, a sample can not completely separated by PLS-DA（PC1=36.3%）,also,PCA was not good method to microbial diversity structure analysis for Biolog ECO datas analysis . PLS and OPLS were used selected microbial maker,both methods were suited