According to its classification at phylum level as in Figure 1. Insert: the relative distribution of annotated reads and ORFs in the major phyla. doi:10.1371/Eliglustat journal.pone.0053779.gfurther validation, the PCR product was sequenced. The sequenced PCR products showed .99 ungapped sequence identity to the computationally predicted putative genes (Table S2). To find out the carbohydrate-active genes in the predicted gene pool, the ORFs were firstly 
searched against the PfamA database based on the Hidden Markol Model (HMM) at E-value cutoff of 1E-4 [11]. The searching results against PfamA database was further screened against the CAZy database for candidate carbohydrate-active genes. Only those CAZy 58543-16-1 families having clear Pfam models were counted to ensure the accuracy of gene mining (Table S3 and S4). 253 candidate genes were identified with a significant match to at least one relevant glycoside hydrolase domain or carbohydrate-binding module as classified in the CAZy database (Table S3 and S4). The candidate genes found in the enrich sludge metagenome fell into a variety of CAZy families (30 out of 130 GH families and 5 out of 64 CBM families defined in the CAZy database). The major GH families were GH3, GH2 and GH9, respectively taking 17.4 , 16.7 and 13.8 of the total annotated genes in GH families, while CBM3 and CBM6 each took 38.6 of genes belongs to CBM families (Table S3 and S4).The retrieved genes were then blast against the NCBI nr database to found out their similarities to known genes. The results showed that around half of the predicted thermophilic cellulolytic genes in the sludge metagenome had quite low (less than 50 ) similarity to known genes in nr database (Figure 4). This poor demonstration of retrieved genes in comprehensive database like nr indicated a high potential of existence of novel thermo-stable genes in the sludge metagenome.Discussion Metagenomic Assembly and Coverage Analysis of the Sludge MetagenomeAdequate coverage is critical for the flawless understanding of a 
metagenome. Hess et al. (2011) had showed a satisfying coverage of a cow rumen metagenome with 65 of the 267.9 Gb Illumina data set used in the assembly (Table S5). Delmont et al. estimated a data size of 120.1 Gb of 454 sequences (equivalent to 405 Titanium runs) to fully cover the grassland soil metagenome [9]. Not mentioning the high sequencing and processing cost, the huge metagenome dataset required to cover such complex metagenome inevitably proscribed the 15755315 application of this technique withinMetagenomic Mining of Cellulolytic GenesFigure 3. ORF and Reads assignment to KEGG Methanogenesis Pathway. Blue square indicates this enzyme has at least one ORF assigned; Yellow square indicates this enzyme has at least one read assigned. Insert: numbers of ORFs and reads assigned to enzymes in the pathway. Metabolism modules are highlighted in different colors: blue, “Formate to Methane”; green, “Acetate to Methane”; purple, “Methanol to Methane”; yellow, “Coenzyme M synthesis”; red, enzymes shared among different modules. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0053779.gseveral countable top institutions with the super computational capacity. Nevertheless the present study investigating an enriched reactor microbiome with a compact scale of dataset (1.2 Gb), may demonstrate an applicable practice of metagenomic technology which could be referred to in common research conditions. Similar to the coverage trends illustrated in Figure 1, two coverage trends we.According to its classification at phylum level as in Figure 1. Insert: the relative distribution of annotated reads and ORFs in the major phyla. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0053779.gfurther validation, the PCR product was sequenced. The sequenced PCR products showed .99 ungapped sequence identity to the computationally predicted putative genes (Table S2). To find out the carbohydrate-active genes in the predicted gene pool, the ORFs were firstly searched against the PfamA database based on the Hidden Markol Model (HMM) at E-value cutoff of 1E-4 [11]. The searching results against PfamA database was further screened against the CAZy database for candidate carbohydrate-active genes. Only those CAZy families having clear Pfam models were counted to ensure the accuracy of gene mining (Table S3 and S4). 253 candidate genes were identified with a significant match to at least one relevant glycoside hydrolase domain or carbohydrate-binding module as classified in the CAZy database (Table S3 and S4). The candidate genes found in the enrich sludge metagenome fell into a variety of CAZy families (30 out of 130 GH families and 5 out of 64 CBM families defined in the CAZy database). The major GH families were GH3, GH2 and GH9, respectively taking 17.4 , 16.7 and 13.8 of the total annotated genes in GH families, while CBM3 and CBM6 each took 38.6 of genes belongs to CBM families (Table S3 and S4).The retrieved genes were then blast against the NCBI nr database to found out their similarities to known genes. The results showed that around half of the predicted thermophilic cellulolytic genes in the sludge metagenome had quite low (less than 50 ) similarity to known genes in nr database (Figure 4). This poor demonstration of retrieved genes in comprehensive database like nr indicated a high potential of existence of novel thermo-stable genes in the sludge metagenome.Discussion Metagenomic Assembly and Coverage Analysis of the Sludge MetagenomeAdequate coverage is critical for the flawless understanding of a metagenome. Hess et al. (2011) had showed a satisfying coverage of a cow rumen metagenome with 65 of the 267.9 Gb Illumina data set used in the assembly (Table S5). Delmont et al. estimated a data size of 120.1 Gb of 454 sequences (equivalent to 405 Titanium runs) to fully cover the grassland soil metagenome [9]. Not mentioning the high sequencing and processing cost, the huge metagenome dataset required to cover such complex metagenome inevitably proscribed the 15755315 application of this technique withinMetagenomic Mining of Cellulolytic GenesFigure 3. ORF and Reads assignment to KEGG Methanogenesis Pathway. Blue square indicates this enzyme has at least one ORF assigned; Yellow square indicates this enzyme has at least one read assigned. Insert: numbers of ORFs and reads assigned to enzymes in the pathway. Metabolism modules are highlighted in different colors: blue, “Formate to Methane”; green, “Acetate to Methane”; purple, “Methanol to Methane”; yellow, “Coenzyme M synthesis”; red, enzymes shared among different modules. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0053779.gseveral countable top institutions with the super computational capacity. Nevertheless the present study investigating an enriched reactor microbiome with a compact scale of dataset (1.2 Gb), may demonstrate an applicable practice of metagenomic technology which could be referred to in common research conditions. Similar to the coverage trends illustrated in Figure 1, two coverage trends we.
