Diatom DNA metabarcoding for ecological assessment: Comparison among bioinformatics pipelines used in six European countries reveals the need for standardization.

18S-V4 Bacillariophyta Biomonitoring Metabarcoding Morphological identification rbcL

Journal

The Science of the total environment
ISSN: 1879-1026
Titre abrégé: Sci Total Environ
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0330500

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
25 Nov 2020
Historique:
received: 02 04 2020
revised: 09 07 2020
accepted: 11 07 2020
pubmed: 1 8 2020
medline: 8 10 2020
entrez: 1 8 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Ecological assessment of lakes and rivers using benthic diatom assemblages currently requires considerable taxonomic expertise to identify species using light microscopy. This traditional approach is also time-consuming. Diatom metabarcoding is a promising alternative and there is increasing interest in using this approach for routine assessment. However, until now, analysis protocols for diatom metabarcoding have been developed and optimised by research groups working in isolation. The diversity of existing bioinformatics methods highlights the need for an assessment of the performance and comparability of results of different methods. The aim of this study was to test the correspondence of outputs from six bioinformatics pipelines currently in use for diatom metabarcoding in different European countries. Raw sequence data from 29 biofilm samples were treated by each of the bioinformatics pipelines, five of them using the same curated reference database. The outputs of the pipelines were compared in terms of sequence unit assemblages, taxonomic assignment, biotic index score and ecological assessment outcomes. The three last components were also compared to outputs from traditional light microscopy, which is currently accepted for ecological assessment of phytobenthos, as required by the Water Framework Directive. We also tested the performance of the pipelines on the two DNA markers (rbcL and 18S-V4) that are currently used by the working groups participating in this study. The sequence unit assemblages produced by different pipelines showed significant differences in terms of assigned and unassigned read numbers and sequence unit numbers. When comparing the taxonomic assignments at genus and species level, correspondence of the taxonomic assemblages between pipelines was weak. Most discrepancies were linked to differential detection or quantification of taxa, despite the use of the same reference database. Subsequent calculation of biotic index scores also showed significant differences between approaches, which were reflected in the final ecological assessment. Use of the rbcL marker always resulted in better correlation among molecular datasets and also in results closer to these generated using traditional microscopy. This study shows that decisions made in pipeline design have implications for the dataset's structure and the taxonomic assemblage, which in turn may affect biotic index calculation and ecological assessment. There is a need to define best-practice bioinformatics parameters in order to ensure the best representation of diatom assemblages. Only the use of similar parameters will ensure the compatibility of data from different working groups. The future of diatom metabarcoding for ecological assessment may also lie in the development of new metrics using, for example, presence/absence instead of relative abundance data.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32736102
pii: S0048-9697(20)34477-6
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140948
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

140948

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Bonnie Bailet (B)

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment, PO Box 7050, SE - 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden. Electronic address: bonnie.bailet@slu.se.

Laure Apothéloz-Perret-Gentil (L)

Department of Genetics and Evolution, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland. Electronic address: Laure.Perret-Gentil@unige.ch.

Ana Baričević (A)

Center for Marine Research, Ruđer Bosˇković Institute, Rovinj, Croatia. Electronic address: ana.baricevic@cim.irb.hr.

Teofana Chonova (T)

Research Department for Limnology, Mondsee, Faculty of Biology, University of Innsbruck, Mondsee, Austria; CARRTEL, French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), University of Savoie Mont Blanc, 75 bis avenue de Corzent, 74200 Thonon-les-Bains, France. Electronic address: teofana.chonova@inrae.fr.

Alain Franc (A)

BioGeCo, French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), 69 route d'Arcachon, 33610 Cesta, France. Electronic address: alain.franc@inra.fr.

Jean-Marc Frigerio (JM)

BioGeCo, French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), 69 route d'Arcachon, 33610 Cesta, France. Electronic address: Jean-Marc.Frigerio@inrae.fr.

Martyn Kelly (M)

Bowburn Consultancy, 11 Monteigne Drive, Bowburn, Durham DH6 5QB, UK; School of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK. Electronic address: MGkelly@bowburn-consultancy.co.uk.

Demetrio Mora (D)

Botanic Garden and Botanical Museum Berlin-Dahlem, Freie Universität Berlin, Königin-Luise-Str. 6-8, 14195 Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: d.mora@bgbm.org.

Martin Pfannkuchen (M)

Center for Marine Research, Ruđer Bosˇković Institute, Rovinj, Croatia. Electronic address: pfannkuchen@cim.irb.hr.

Sebastian Proft (S)

Botanic Garden and Botanical Museum Berlin-Dahlem, Freie Universität Berlin, Königin-Luise-Str. 6-8, 14195 Berlin, Germany.

Mathieu Ramon (M)

Fera Science Ltd, Sand Hutton, York YO41 1LZ, UK. Electronic address: Mathieu.Ramon@fera.co.uk.

Valentin Vasselon (V)

AFB, Pôle R&D "ECLA", INRA, UMR CARRTEL, 75bis av. de Corzent - CS 50511, FR-74200 Thonon-les-Bains, France.

Jonas Zimmermann (J)

Botanic Garden and Botanical Museum Berlin-Dahlem, Freie Universität Berlin, Königin-Luise-Str. 6-8, 14195 Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: j.zimmermann@bgbm.org.

Maria Kahlert (M)

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment, PO Box 7050, SE - 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden. Electronic address: maria.kahlert@slu.se.

Articles similaires

Glycogen Storage Disease Type II Humans Critical Pathways Europe
Humans Colorectal Neoplasms Biomarkers, Tumor Prognosis Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
Rivers Turkey Biodiversity Environmental Monitoring Animals

Classifications MeSH