Ground-truthing phylotype assignments for Antarctic invertebrates

DNA Barcodes Pub Date : 2017-01-27 DOI:10.1515/DNA-2017-0001
Paul Czechowski, L. Clarke, A. Cooper, M. Stevens
{"title":"Ground-truthing phylotype assignments for Antarctic invertebrates","authors":"Paul Czechowski, L. Clarke, A. Cooper, M. Stevens","doi":"10.1515/DNA-2017-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Biodiversity information from Antarctic terrestrial habitats helps conservation efforts, but the distribution and diversity particularly of microinvertebrates remains poorly understood. Springtails, mites, tardigrades, nematodes and rotifers are difficult to identify using morphological features, hence DNA-based metabarcoding methods are well suited for their study. We compared taxonomy assignments of a high throughput sequencing metabarcoding approach using one ribosomal DNA (18S rDNA) and one mitochondrial DNA (cytochrome c oxidase subunit I - COI) marker with morphological reference data. Specifically, we compared metabarcoding or morphological taxonomic assignments on multiple taxonomic levels in an artificial DNA blend containing Australian invertebrates, and in seven extracts of Antarctic soils containing known micro-faunal taxa. Avoiding arbitrary application of metabarcoding analysis parameters, we calibrated those parameters with metabarcoding data from non-Antarctic soils. Metabarcoding approaches employing 18S rDNA and COI markers enabled detection of small and cryptic Antarctic invertebrates, and on low taxonomic ranks 18S data outperformed COI data in this respect. Morphological taxonomy determination did not outperform metabarcoding approaches. Our study demonstrates how barcoding markers can be tested prior to their application to specific taxonomic groups, and that taxonomy fidelity of markers needs to be validated in relation to environment, taxa, and available reference information.","PeriodicalId":446240,"journal":{"name":"DNA Barcodes","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DNA Barcodes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/DNA-2017-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Biodiversity information from Antarctic terrestrial habitats helps conservation efforts, but the distribution and diversity particularly of microinvertebrates remains poorly understood. Springtails, mites, tardigrades, nematodes and rotifers are difficult to identify using morphological features, hence DNA-based metabarcoding methods are well suited for their study. We compared taxonomy assignments of a high throughput sequencing metabarcoding approach using one ribosomal DNA (18S rDNA) and one mitochondrial DNA (cytochrome c oxidase subunit I - COI) marker with morphological reference data. Specifically, we compared metabarcoding or morphological taxonomic assignments on multiple taxonomic levels in an artificial DNA blend containing Australian invertebrates, and in seven extracts of Antarctic soils containing known micro-faunal taxa. Avoiding arbitrary application of metabarcoding analysis parameters, we calibrated those parameters with metabarcoding data from non-Antarctic soils. Metabarcoding approaches employing 18S rDNA and COI markers enabled detection of small and cryptic Antarctic invertebrates, and on low taxonomic ranks 18S data outperformed COI data in this respect. Morphological taxonomy determination did not outperform metabarcoding approaches. Our study demonstrates how barcoding markers can be tested prior to their application to specific taxonomic groups, and that taxonomy fidelity of markers needs to be validated in relation to environment, taxa, and available reference information.
南极无脊椎动物的真实的种型分配
来自南极陆地栖息地的生物多样性信息有助于保护工作,但对特别是微型无脊椎动物的分布和多样性仍然知之甚少。弹尾虫、螨虫、缓步虫、线虫和轮虫很难通过形态学特征进行鉴定,因此基于dna的元条形码方法非常适合对它们进行研究。我们使用一个核糖体DNA (18S rDNA)和一个线粒体DNA(细胞色素c氧化酶亚基I - COI)标记与形态学参考数据比较了高通量测序元条形码方法的分类分配。具体来说,我们比较了包含澳大利亚无脊椎动物的人工DNA混合物和包含已知微动物类群的南极土壤的7个提取物在多个分类水平上的元条形码或形态分类分配。为了避免元条形码分析参数的任意应用,我们使用非南极土壤的元条形码数据对这些参数进行了校准。使用18S rDNA和COI标记的元条形码方法可以检测小型和神秘的南极无脊椎动物,并且在低分类等级上,18S数据在这方面优于COI数据。形态分类的确定并不优于元条形码方法。我们的研究证明了条形码标记在应用于特定分类类群之前如何进行测试,以及标记的分类保真度需要根据环境、分类群和可用参考信息进行验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信