| Measure | Within-sample differences | Est | 95% CI | T | df | P |
---|
A) | Mock microbial community |
Total DNA yield (ng) | MetaSUB – Jiang | −3 | [−28.5, 22.5] | −0.37 | 3 | 0.73 |
MetaSUB – Zymobiomics | −7 | [−46.5, 32.5] | −0.45 | 5 | 0.67 |
16S rRNA gene copy yield (copies) | MetaSUB – Jiang | 17,107 | [− 634, 34,848] | 3.07 | 3 | 0.055 |
MetaSUB – Zymobiomics | −11,452 | [− 83,155, 60,251] | −0.41 | 5 | 0.70 |
B) | Subway air samples |
Total DNA yield (ng) | MetaSUB – Jiang | 1.07 | [0.77, 1.37] | 8.01 | 9 | < 0.001 |
MetaSUB – Zymobiomics | 1.35 | [0.86, 1.85] | 5.94 | 13 | < 0.001 |
16S rRNA gene copy yield (copies) | MetaSUB – Jiang | 5046 | [3882, 6211] | 9.80 | 9 | < 0.001 |
MetaSUB – Zymobiomics | 3451 | [1741, 5162] | 4.36 | 13 | < 0.001 |
- One-sample t-test on within-sample differences (H0: difference in within-sample measurements = 0) for different method pairs with mock microbial community (A) and subway air samples (B). Measures from Jiang/Zymobiomics were subtracted from the MetaSUB measures: the estimate (est) gives the departure from zero of the resultant values (larger than zero values indicate that MetaSUB had a higher yield than Jiang/Zymobiomics)