Pamela Olmedo-Rojas, Gert‐Jan Jeunen, M. Lamare, Johanna D. Turnbull, A. Terauds, N. Gemmell, Ceridwen I. Fraser
{"title":"低生物量地区土壤环境DNA代谢编码需要方案优化:以南极洲为例","authors":"Pamela Olmedo-Rojas, Gert‐Jan Jeunen, M. Lamare, Johanna D. Turnbull, A. Terauds, N. Gemmell, Ceridwen I. Fraser","doi":"10.1017/S0954102022000384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Environmental DNA is a powerful tool for monitoring biodiversity. Although environmental DNA surveys have successfully been implemented in various environments, protocol choice has been shown to affect results and inferences. Thus far, few method comparison studies for soil have been undertaken. Here, we optimized the workflow for soil metabarcoding through a comparative study encompassing variation in sampling strategy (individual and combined samples), DNA extraction (PowerSoil®, NucleoSpin® Soil, PowerSoil® + phosphate buffer and NucleoSpin® Soil + phosphate buffer) and library preparation (one-step and two-step quantitative polymerase chain reaction methods). Using a partial 18S rRNA marker, a total of 309 eukaryotic taxa across 21 phyla were identified from Antarctic soil from one site in the Larsemann Hills. Our optimized workflow was effective with no notable reduction in data quality for a considerable increase in time and cost efficiency. The NucleoSpin® Soil + phosphate buffer was the best-performing extraction method. Compared to similar studies in other regions, we obtained low taxonomic coverage, perhaps because of the paucity of Antarctic terrestrial organisms in genetic reference databases. Our findings provide useful methodological insights for maximizing efficiency in soil metabarcoding studies in Antarctica and other low-biomass environments.","PeriodicalId":50972,"journal":{"name":"Antarctic Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Soil environmental DNA metabarcoding in low-biomass regions requires protocol optimization: a case study in Antarctica\",\"authors\":\"Pamela Olmedo-Rojas, Gert‐Jan Jeunen, M. Lamare, Johanna D. Turnbull, A. Terauds, N. Gemmell, Ceridwen I. Fraser\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0954102022000384\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Environmental DNA is a powerful tool for monitoring biodiversity. Although environmental DNA surveys have successfully been implemented in various environments, protocol choice has been shown to affect results and inferences. Thus far, few method comparison studies for soil have been undertaken. Here, we optimized the workflow for soil metabarcoding through a comparative study encompassing variation in sampling strategy (individual and combined samples), DNA extraction (PowerSoil®, NucleoSpin® Soil, PowerSoil® + phosphate buffer and NucleoSpin® Soil + phosphate buffer) and library preparation (one-step and two-step quantitative polymerase chain reaction methods). Using a partial 18S rRNA marker, a total of 309 eukaryotic taxa across 21 phyla were identified from Antarctic soil from one site in the Larsemann Hills. Our optimized workflow was effective with no notable reduction in data quality for a considerable increase in time and cost efficiency. The NucleoSpin® Soil + phosphate buffer was the best-performing extraction method. Compared to similar studies in other regions, we obtained low taxonomic coverage, perhaps because of the paucity of Antarctic terrestrial organisms in genetic reference databases. Our findings provide useful methodological insights for maximizing efficiency in soil metabarcoding studies in Antarctica and other low-biomass environments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antarctic Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antarctic Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102022000384\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antarctic Science","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102022000384","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Soil environmental DNA metabarcoding in low-biomass regions requires protocol optimization: a case study in Antarctica
Abstract Environmental DNA is a powerful tool for monitoring biodiversity. Although environmental DNA surveys have successfully been implemented in various environments, protocol choice has been shown to affect results and inferences. Thus far, few method comparison studies for soil have been undertaken. Here, we optimized the workflow for soil metabarcoding through a comparative study encompassing variation in sampling strategy (individual and combined samples), DNA extraction (PowerSoil®, NucleoSpin® Soil, PowerSoil® + phosphate buffer and NucleoSpin® Soil + phosphate buffer) and library preparation (one-step and two-step quantitative polymerase chain reaction methods). Using a partial 18S rRNA marker, a total of 309 eukaryotic taxa across 21 phyla were identified from Antarctic soil from one site in the Larsemann Hills. Our optimized workflow was effective with no notable reduction in data quality for a considerable increase in time and cost efficiency. The NucleoSpin® Soil + phosphate buffer was the best-performing extraction method. Compared to similar studies in other regions, we obtained low taxonomic coverage, perhaps because of the paucity of Antarctic terrestrial organisms in genetic reference databases. Our findings provide useful methodological insights for maximizing efficiency in soil metabarcoding studies in Antarctica and other low-biomass environments.
期刊介绍:
Antarctic Science provides a truly international forum for the broad spread of studies that increasingly characterise scientific research in the Antarctic. Whilst emphasising interdisciplinary work, the journal publishes papers from environmental management to biodiversity, from volcanoes to icebergs, and from oceanography to the upper atmosphere. No other journal covers such a wide range of Antarctic scientific studies. The journal attracts papers from all countries currently undertaking Antarctic research. It publishes both review and data papers with no limits on length, two-page short notes on technical developments and recent discoveries, and book reviews. These, together with an editorial discussing broader aspects of science, provide a rich and varied mixture of items to interest researchers in all areas of science. There are no page charges, or charges for colour, to authors publishing in the Journal. One issue each year is normally devoted to a specific theme or papers from a major meeting.