My name is Jeff Norman and I am a doctoral candidate in Jeb Barrett's lab at 
Virginia Tech.

I've spent most of my Ph.D. studying ammonia-oxidizing microbes, mostly using 
qPCR to estimate 
the growth and abundance of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and archaea (AOA) 
in temperate 
soil environments.  For one chapter of my Ph.D. I hope to estimate the 
diversity of soil AOA and 
AOB as well.  I had planned on doing this using amplicon-based 454 sequencing 
of the amoA gene 
relevant to each group. Though I've had good luck with funding for the rest of 
my Ph.D., I've had a 
hard time securing funding for this analysis.  I have been looking into other 
ways of estimating 
AOA and AOB diversity, and our lab manager alerted me about an interesting 
procedure called 
amplicot (the name is based on Cot-curve style analysis of PCR amplicons).

Here are two references from Nature Methods about amplicot:

1) Arstila, T.P. 2006. Estimating diversity, the easy way. Nature Methods 
3(11): 879-890.
2) Baum, P.D., and J.M. McCune. 2006. Direct measurement of T-cell receptor 
diversity with 
Amplicot.  Nature Methods 3(11): 895-901.

There is also an amplicot website:

http://amplicot.ucsf.edu/

The basic principal is pretty simple:  First a PCR amplicon is created and 
combined with SYBR 
green dye.  Then, the product is denatured at high temperature and allowed to 
re-anneal in a 
quantitative thermocycler.  The annealing time is tracked by fluorescence and 
used as a metric of 
sequence diversity (samples with longer annealing times should be more diverse 
than samples 
with shorter annealing times).

I am interested in using this procedure to estimate relative differences in 
diversity of AOA and 
AOB between my samples.  Amplicot appeals to me because I have the majority of 
the necessary 
materials on hand, and it would therefore be inexpensive for me to perform.  
Furthermore, I have 
few enough samples that I could probably squeeze them into one run, and not 
have to correct for 
run to run differences, which would potentially make this procedure more 
complex.  Before I go 
down this road, however, I have a couple of questions for you guys:

1)  I have noticed that all the papers citing the original amplicot protocol 
(Baum and McCune 
2006, above) seem to be in immunological journals, and not in ecological 
journals.  Has anyone 
tried this procedure for environmental samples in the way I'm proposing here?
2)  Do you think that a paper based on amplicot analysis would be publishable 
in ecology/soil 
journals?

I would appreciate answers to these questions along with any additional insight 
you can provide!

Jeff

-------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Norman
PhD Candidate
Department of Biological Sciences
Virginia Tech
2119 Derring Hall, Blacksburg VA 24060

Reply via email to