Comparative Analysis of Environmental DNA Metabarcoding and Spectro-Fluorescence for Phytoplankton Community Assessments

Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Romana Salis, Lars-Anders Hansson
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Environmental DNA Metabarcoding and Spectro-Fluorescence for Phytoplankton Community Assessments","authors":"Romana Salis,&nbsp;Lars-Anders Hansson","doi":"10.1002/edn3.70097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Quantifications of phytoplankton biomass and species composition are crucial for monitoring biodiversity and population dynamics in aquatic environments, and both direct microscopic counts and fluorescence-based methods have been widely used for monitoring. Recent advancements in DNA metabarcoding offer an alternative way of easily assessing diversity and species composition. However, a comprehensive comparison of the relative merits and limitations of DNA- and fluorescence-based methods is currently lacking. Here we compare phytoplankton community composition measured via fluorescence and DNA metabarcoding in an outdoor, replicated mesocosm experiment. We show that there is a positive correlation between fluorescence-measured biomass and DNA read and amplicon sequence variants (ASV) numbers for cyanobacteria, but either weak or no correlation for the other phytoplankton groups assessed (cryptophytes, chromophytes, and green algae). In addition, DNA metabarcoding was systematically better at detecting cryptophytes, which were rarely detected via fluorescence. Hence, while DNA metabarcoding may not provide reliable biomass estimates for the majority of phytoplankton groups, metabarcoding analysis offers higher taxonomic resolution and the capability to detect rare phytoplankton groups. Overall, our findings provide new insights into the strengths and limitations of each method and highlight the considerable potential and importance of including DNA barcoding in freshwater ecosystem assessment and biomonitoring programmes with a focus on biodiversity assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":52828,"journal":{"name":"Environmental DNA","volume":"7 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/edn3.70097","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental DNA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/edn3.70097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Quantifications of phytoplankton biomass and species composition are crucial for monitoring biodiversity and population dynamics in aquatic environments, and both direct microscopic counts and fluorescence-based methods have been widely used for monitoring. Recent advancements in DNA metabarcoding offer an alternative way of easily assessing diversity and species composition. However, a comprehensive comparison of the relative merits and limitations of DNA- and fluorescence-based methods is currently lacking. Here we compare phytoplankton community composition measured via fluorescence and DNA metabarcoding in an outdoor, replicated mesocosm experiment. We show that there is a positive correlation between fluorescence-measured biomass and DNA read and amplicon sequence variants (ASV) numbers for cyanobacteria, but either weak or no correlation for the other phytoplankton groups assessed (cryptophytes, chromophytes, and green algae). In addition, DNA metabarcoding was systematically better at detecting cryptophytes, which were rarely detected via fluorescence. Hence, while DNA metabarcoding may not provide reliable biomass estimates for the majority of phytoplankton groups, metabarcoding analysis offers higher taxonomic resolution and the capability to detect rare phytoplankton groups. Overall, our findings provide new insights into the strengths and limitations of each method and highlight the considerable potential and importance of including DNA barcoding in freshwater ecosystem assessment and biomonitoring programmes with a focus on biodiversity assessments.

Abstract Image

环境DNA元条形码与荧光光谱法评价浮游植物群落的比较分析
浮游植物生物量和物种组成的量化对于监测水生环境中的生物多样性和种群动态至关重要,直接显微计数和基于荧光的方法已广泛用于监测。DNA元条形码的最新进展提供了一种易于评估多样性和物种组成的替代方法。然而,目前缺乏对基于DNA和基于荧光的方法的相对优点和局限性的全面比较。在这里,我们比较了通过荧光和DNA元条形码测量的浮游植物群落组成,在室外,重复的中生态实验中。我们发现,荧光测量的生物量与蓝藻的DNA读取和扩增子序列变异(ASV)数量呈正相关,但与其他浮游植物类群(隐生植物、色生植物和绿藻)的相关性很弱或没有相关性。此外,DNA元条形码系统地更好地检测了很少通过荧光检测到的隐生植物。因此,虽然DNA元条形码可能无法为大多数浮游植物类群提供可靠的生物量估计,但元条形码分析提供了更高的分类分辨率和检测稀有浮游植物类群的能力。总的来说,我们的研究结果为每种方法的优势和局限性提供了新的见解,并强调了将DNA条形码纳入淡水生态系统评估和生物多样性评估的生物监测计划的巨大潜力和重要性。
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
Environmental DNA
Environmental DNA Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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