Comparing species detection success between molecular markers in DNA metabarcoding of coastal macroinvertebrates

B. R. Leite, Pedro E. Vieira, J. Troncoso, F. Costa
{"title":"Comparing species detection success between molecular markers in DNA metabarcoding of coastal macroinvertebrates","authors":"B. R. Leite, Pedro E. Vieira, J. Troncoso, F. Costa","doi":"10.3897/mbmg.5.70063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"DNA metabarcoding has great potential to improve marine biomonitoring programs by providing a rapid and accurate assessment of species composition in zoobenthic communities. However, some methodological improvements are still required, especially regarding failed detections, primers efficiency and incompleteness of databases. Here we assessed the efficiency of two different marker loci (COI and 18S) and three primer pairs in marine species detection through DNA metabarcoding of the macrozoobenthic communities colonizing three types of artificial substrates (slate, PVC and granite), sampled between 3 and 15 months of deployment. To accurately compare detection success between markers, we also compared the representativeness of the detected species in public databases and revised the reliability of the taxonomic assignments. Globally, we recorded extensive complementarity in the species detected by each marker, with 69% of the species exclusively detected by either 18S or COI. Individually, each of the three primer pairs recovered, at most, 52% of all species detected on the samples, showing also different abilities to amplify specific taxonomic groups. Most of the detected species have reliable reference sequences in their respective databases (82% for COI and 72% for 18S), meaning that when a species was detected by one marker and not by the other, it was most likely due to faulty amplification, and not by lack of matching sequences in the database. Overall, results showed the impact of marker and primer applied on species detection ability and indicated that, currently, if only a single marker or primer pair is employed in marine zoobenthos metabarcoding, a fair portion of the diversity may be overlooked.","PeriodicalId":18374,"journal":{"name":"Metabarcoding and Metagenomics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metabarcoding and Metagenomics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/mbmg.5.70063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

DNA metabarcoding has great potential to improve marine biomonitoring programs by providing a rapid and accurate assessment of species composition in zoobenthic communities. However, some methodological improvements are still required, especially regarding failed detections, primers efficiency and incompleteness of databases. Here we assessed the efficiency of two different marker loci (COI and 18S) and three primer pairs in marine species detection through DNA metabarcoding of the macrozoobenthic communities colonizing three types of artificial substrates (slate, PVC and granite), sampled between 3 and 15 months of deployment. To accurately compare detection success between markers, we also compared the representativeness of the detected species in public databases and revised the reliability of the taxonomic assignments. Globally, we recorded extensive complementarity in the species detected by each marker, with 69% of the species exclusively detected by either 18S or COI. Individually, each of the three primer pairs recovered, at most, 52% of all species detected on the samples, showing also different abilities to amplify specific taxonomic groups. Most of the detected species have reliable reference sequences in their respective databases (82% for COI and 72% for 18S), meaning that when a species was detected by one marker and not by the other, it was most likely due to faulty amplification, and not by lack of matching sequences in the database. Overall, results showed the impact of marker and primer applied on species detection ability and indicated that, currently, if only a single marker or primer pair is employed in marine zoobenthos metabarcoding, a fair portion of the diversity may be overlooked.
Comparing沿海大型无脊椎动物DNA元条形码分子标记之间的物种检测成功
DNA元条形码通过提供快速准确的底栖动物群落物种组成评估,在改善海洋生物监测计划方面具有巨大的潜力。然而,在方法上仍需改进,特别是在检测失败、引物效率和数据库不完整方面。在此,我们评估了两个不同的标记位点(COI和18S)和三个引物对通过DNA元条形码检测三种人工基质(石板、PVC和花岗岩)上的大型底栖动物群落的效率,取样时间为3至15个月。为了准确比较标记之间的检测成功率,我们还比较了公共数据库中检测物种的代表性,并修改了分类分配的可靠性。在全球范围内,我们记录到每种标记检测到的物种具有广泛的互补性,69%的物种只被18S或COI检测到。3对引物分别最多恢复了样品中检测到的52%的物种,也显示出不同的扩增特定分类群的能力。大多数检测到的物种在各自的数据库中都有可靠的参考序列(COI为82%,18S为72%),这意味着当一个物种被一个标记检测到而另一个标记检测不到时,很可能是由于错误的扩增,而不是由于数据库中缺乏匹配的序列。总体而言,研究结果显示了标记物和引物对物种检测能力的影响,并表明目前在海洋底栖动物元条形码中,如果只使用单一的标记物或引物对,可能会忽略相当一部分的多样性。
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
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Animal Science and Zoology
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
×
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