Sequencing of Enteric Bacteria: Library Preparation Procedure Matters for Accurate Identification and Characterization.

Enzymatic library preparation kits are increasingly used for bacterial whole genome sequencing. While they offer a rapid workflow, the transposases used in the kits are recognized to be somewhat biased. The aim of this study was to optimize and validate a protocol for the Illumina DNA Prep kit (formerly Nextera DNA Flex) for sequencing enteric pathogens and compare its performance against the Nextera XT kit. One hundred forty-three strains of , , , , , and were prepared with both methods and sequenced on the Illumina MiSeq using 300 and/or 500 cycle chemistries. Sequences were compared using core genome multilocus sequence typing (cgMLST), 7-gene multilocus sequence typing (MLST), and detection of markers encoding serotype, virulence, and antimicrobial resistance. Sequences for one strain were downsampled to determine the minimum coverage required for the analyses. While organism-specific differences were observed, the Prep libraries generated longer average read lengths and less fragmented assemblies compared to the XT libraries. In downstream analysis, the most notable difference between the kits was observed for , particularly for the 300 cycle sequences. The O group was not predicted in 32% and 4% of XT sequences when using blast and kmer algorithms, respectively, while the O group was predicted from all Prep sequences regardless of the algorithm. In addition, the gene was not detected in 6% of XT sequences and 34% were missing one or more of the type III secretion systems and/or plasmid-associated genes, which were detected in the Prep sequences. The coverage downsampling revealed that acceptable assembly quality and allele detection was achieved at 30 × coverage with the Prep libraries, whereas 40-50 × coverage was required for the XT libraries. The better performance of the Prep libraries was attributed to more even coverage, particularly in genome regions low in GC content.