Evaluation of non-destructive DNA extraction protocols for insect metabarcoding: gentler and shorter is better

D. Marquina, T. Roslin, Piotr Łukasik, F. Ronquist
{"title":"Evaluation of non-destructive DNA extraction protocols for insect metabarcoding: gentler and shorter is better","authors":"D. Marquina, T. Roslin, Piotr Łukasik, F. Ronquist","doi":"10.3897/mbmg.6.78871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"DNA metabarcoding can accelerate research on insect diversity, as it is cheap and fast compared to manual sorting and identification. Most metabarcoding protocols require homogenisation of the sample, preventing further work on the specimens. Mild digestion of the tissue by incubation in a lysis buffer has been proposed as an alternative, and, although some mild lysis protocols have already been presented, they have so far not been evaluated against each other. Here, we analyse how two mild lysis buffers (one more aggressive, one gentler in terms of tissue degradation), two different incubation times, and two DNA purification methods (a manual precipitation and an automated protocol) affect the accuracy of retrieving the true composition of mock communities using two mitochondrial markers (COI and 16S). We found that protocol-specific variation in concentration and purity of the DNA extracts produced had little effect on the recovery of species. However, the two lysis treatments differed in quantification of species abundances. Digestion in the gentler buffer and for a shorter time yielded better representation of original sample composition. Digestion in a more aggressive buffer or longer incubation time yielded lower alpha diversity values and increased differences between metabarcoding results and the true species-abundance distribution. We conclude that the details of non-destructive protocols can have a significant effect on metabarcoding performance. A short and mild lysis treatment appears the best choice for recovering the true composition of the sample. This not only improves accuracy, but also comes with a faster processing time than the other treatments.","PeriodicalId":18374,"journal":{"name":"Metabarcoding and Metagenomics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metabarcoding and Metagenomics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/mbmg.6.78871","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

DNA metabarcoding can accelerate research on insect diversity, as it is cheap and fast compared to manual sorting and identification. Most metabarcoding protocols require homogenisation of the sample, preventing further work on the specimens. Mild digestion of the tissue by incubation in a lysis buffer has been proposed as an alternative, and, although some mild lysis protocols have already been presented, they have so far not been evaluated against each other. Here, we analyse how two mild lysis buffers (one more aggressive, one gentler in terms of tissue degradation), two different incubation times, and two DNA purification methods (a manual precipitation and an automated protocol) affect the accuracy of retrieving the true composition of mock communities using two mitochondrial markers (COI and 16S). We found that protocol-specific variation in concentration and purity of the DNA extracts produced had little effect on the recovery of species. However, the two lysis treatments differed in quantification of species abundances. Digestion in the gentler buffer and for a shorter time yielded better representation of original sample composition. Digestion in a more aggressive buffer or longer incubation time yielded lower alpha diversity values and increased differences between metabarcoding results and the true species-abundance distribution. We conclude that the details of non-destructive protocols can have a significant effect on metabarcoding performance. A short and mild lysis treatment appears the best choice for recovering the true composition of the sample. This not only improves accuracy, but also comes with a faster processing time than the other treatments.
Evaluation昆虫元条形码的无损DNA提取方案:更温和,更短
DNA代谢编码可以加速昆虫多样性的研究,因为与人工分类和鉴定相比,它既便宜又快速。大多数代谢条形码方案都需要对样本进行均质化,从而阻止对样本进行进一步的工作。已经提出了通过在裂解缓冲液中孵育对组织进行温和消化作为替代方案,并且,尽管已经提出了一些温和的裂解方案,但到目前为止,它们还没有相互评估。在这里,我们分析了两种温和的裂解缓冲液(一种更具攻击性,一种在组织降解方面更温和)、两种不同的孵育时间和两种DNA纯化方法(手动沉淀和自动方案)如何影响使用两种线粒体标记物(COI和16S)检索模拟群落真实组成的准确性。我们发现,产生的DNA提取物的浓度和纯度的方案特异性变化对物种的回收几乎没有影响。然而,两种裂解处理在物种丰度的量化上存在差异。在较温和的缓冲液中消化较短的时间可以更好地代表原始样品的组成。在更具攻击性的缓冲液中消化或更长的孵育时间产生较低的α多样性值,并增加代谢编码结果与真实物种丰度分布之间的差异。我们得出的结论是,非破坏性协议的细节可能会对元编码性能产生重大影响。短而温和的裂解处理似乎是恢复样品真实成分的最佳选择。这不仅提高了准确性,而且处理时间比其他处理更快。
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