Table 1.
Genome coverage of genome operational taxonomic units (gOTUs) per sub-community. All gOTUs in the same cluster were classified with the same taxonomy. Mapping the reads from all libraries to the gOTUs was done irrespective of their recovery. We removed gOTUs with less than ten times coverage and labeled them as below the detection limit (BDL). The marks indicate in which library the gOTUs were recovered. The numbers in parenthesis indicate the coverage times of each gOTU in the libraries expressed in percentages. (DG: Dominant sub-community; LA: Low abundant sub-community; OG: Outer gate sub-community; UC: Unsorted sub-community).
| gOTUs | UC | DG | LA | OG | UC | DG | LA | OG | Species |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| gOTU_01 | 73 (22.8%) | 147 (55.47%) | 52 (13.50%) | 103 (26.54%) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Escherichia flexneri |
| gOTU_02 | 35 (10.63%) | BDL (<3.80%) |
42 (10.90%) | 22 (5.67%) | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | Comamonas terrigena |
| gOTU_03 | 30 (9.11%) | 45 (16.98%) | 72 (18.70%) | 89 (22.93%) | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | Acinetobacter bouvetii |
| gOTU_04 | 82 (24.92%) | 28 (10.56%) | 25 (10.56%) | 41 (10.56%) | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | Acinetobacter baumannii |
| gOTU_05 | 10 (3.03%) | 10 (3.77%) | BDL (<2.60%) |
BDL (<2.58%) |
✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | Sphingobacterium sp. |
| gOTU_06 | 35 (10.63%) | BDL (<3.80%) |
BDL (<2.60%) |
13 (3.35%) | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | Empedobacter falsenii |
| gOTU_07 | 17 (5.16%) | BDL (<3.80%) |
14 (3.63%) | 16 (4.12%) | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | Elizabethkingia ursingii |
| gOTU_08 | 12 (3.64%) | BDL (<3.80%) |
12 (3.11%) | 11 (2.83%) | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | Elizabethkingia miricola |
| gOTU_09 | 43 (3.06%) | 35 (13.20%) | 35 (9.09%) | 32 (8.24%) | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | Acinetobacter pittii |
| gOTU_10 | 10 (3.03%) | BDL (<3.80%) |
14 (3.63%) | 24 (6.18%) | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | Acinetobacter gerneri |
| gOTU_11 | 20 (6.07%) | BDL (<3.80%) |
119 (30.90%) | 37 (9.53%) | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | Variovoarax sp. |