- Which samples and features are included
- How microbial features are grouped
- How technical factors, such as sequencing depth or low-abundance noise, are handled.
Why is it useful? Is it necessary?
Microbiome feature tables are often sparse, noisy, and affected by technical variation:- Some features are detected at very low abundance or in very few samples.
- Some samples have much higher or lower sequencing depth than others.
- The reliability of taxonomic or functional assignments depends on the sequencing technology and reference database used.
Done well: more robust, easier-to-interpret results.
Pre-processing the microbial feature table
In Cosmos-Hub 2.0, the feature table representing microbial composition in a cohort can be expressed with different metrics:- Counts: the number of (adjusted) sequencing reads mapped to an annotated reference, such as a microbial genome, gene, or functional module.
- Relative abundances: the proportion of reads assigned to a feature out of the total reads in the sample, often expressed as a percentage. Relative abundances within a single profile are compositional, because they sum to 100%.
- Presence / absence: a binary value indicating only whether a feature is considered detected in a sample, without quantifying how much is present. Presence calls typically depend on a minimum relative abundance threshold.
- Rows are features (taxa, genes, or pathways).
- Columns are samples.
- Each cell is a value (count, relative abundance, or presence/absence).
Each analysis module applies its own requirements on top of these pre-processing settings (for example, rarefaction depth for diversity, or specific transformations for machine learning), but they all start from the same pre-processed feature table.