Fig. 2

Taxonomic composition of the recovered MAGs. a Static images from anvi’o’s interactive display for recovered MAGs from the hindguts of E. pulchripes (DE2, 3, 5) and G. connexa (DG1, 2, 5). The tree (dendrogram) at the central section of the anvi’o interactive image shows the hierarchical clustering of MAGs based on their sequence composition and their distribution across samples. From inner to outer layers: length layer (shows the actual length of a genome in Mbps), GC-content, four view layers with information about MAGs across samples (mean coverage), completion, redundancy, source (automatically binned with MetaBAT2 and manually refined), domain of the MAGs (archaea or bacteria), genome phylum, class and species based on GTDB-Tk. The bars show the total number of reads mapped, sample source (hindgut) and sample names (E. pulchripes and G. connexa) (b) Phylogenomic tree based on 39 concatenated bacterial single copy gene (ribosomal proteins, see Table S8). c Potentially novel species from the hindgut of E. pulchripes and G. connexa identified with GTDB-Tk based on relative evolutionary distance. d The relative abundance of MAGs in the metagenomic and metatranscriptomic read samples, estimated for each sample replicate and the average was used in the plotting. DE and RE indicate the relative abundance of MAGs in the metagenome and metatranscriptomes of E. pulchripes, whereas DG and RG indicate the relative abundance of MAGs in the metagenome and metatranscriptomes of G. connexa