Caught in the middle with multiple displacement amplification: the myth of pooling for avoiding multiple displacement amplification bias in a metagenome

Table 2 Correlation coefficient of pairwise comparison of gene coverage in control and multiple displacement amplification treatments

	Pearson’s correlation coefficient
	Treatments	Control	Single MDA
Blue7	Single MDA	0.21^†
	Pooled MDA	0.37^†	0.86^‡
Fruitloop	Single MDA	0.07
	Pooled MDA	0.04	0.98^‡
Gumball-1	Single MDA	−0.31^†
	Pooled MDA	−0.33^†	0.94^‡
Gumball-2	Single MDA	−0.31^†
	Pooled MDA	−0.36^†	0.82^‡
Lambda	Single MDA	0.16
	Pooled MDA	0.10	0.99^‡
Porky-1	Single MDA	0.18^†
	Pooled MDA	0.15	0.91^‡
Porky-2	Single MDA	−0.15
	Pooled MDA	−0.09	0.79^‡
T7	Single MDA	−0.42^†
	Pooled MDA	−0.56^†	0.95^‡
VBP32	Single MDA	−0.11
	Pooled MDA	−0.15	0.92^‡
Wee	Single MDA	0.24^†
	Pooled MDA	0.22^†	0.93^‡

Comparisons were of average coverage for each predicted gene in a genome. ^†P < 0.05.
^‡P < 0.0001. MDA, multiple displacement amplification.

ISSN: 2049-2618