Modelling technical and biological biases in macroinvertebrate community assessment from bulk preservative using multiple metabarcoding markers.
biomonitoring
detection probability
ecological indicators
high-throughput sequencing
multimarker metabarcoding
Journal
Molecular ecology
ISSN: 1365-294X
Titre abrégé: Mol Ecol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9214478
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
revised:
29
07
2020
received:
29
03
2020
accepted:
05
08
2020
pubmed:
30
8
2020
medline:
23
7
2021
entrez:
30
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
DNA metabarcoding from the ethanol used to store macroinvertebrate bulk samples is a convenient methodological option in molecular biodiversity assessment and biomonitoring of aquatic ecosystems, as it preserves specimens and reduces problems associated with sample sorting. However, this method may be affected by errors and biases, which need to be thoroughly quantified before it can be mainstreamed into biomonitoring programmes. Here, we used 80 unsorted macroinvertebrate samples collected in Portugal under a Water Framework Directive monitoring programme, to compare community diversity and taxonomic composition metrics estimated through morphotaxonomy versus metabarcoding from storage ethanol using three markers (COI-M19BR2, 16S-Inse01 and 18S-Euka02) and a multimarker approach. A preliminary in silico analysis showed that the three markers were adequate for the target taxa, with detection failures related primarily to the lack of adequate barcodes in public databases. Metabarcoding of ethanol samples retrieved far less taxa per site (alpha diversity) than morphotaxonomy, albeit with smaller differences for COI-M19BR2 and the multimarker approach, while estimates of taxa turnover (beta diversity) among sites were similar across methods. Using generalized linear mixed models, we found that after controlling for differences in read coverage across samples, the probability of detection of a taxon was positively related to its proportional abundance, and negatively so to the presence of heavily sclerotized exoskeleton (e.g., Coleoptera). Overall, using our experimental protocol with different template dilutions, the COI marker showed the best performance, but we recommend the use of a multimarker approach to detect a wider range of taxa in freshwater macroinvertebrate samples. Further methodological development and optimization efforts are needed to reduce biases associated with body armouring and rarity in some macroinvertebrate taxa.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32860303
doi: 10.1111/mec.15620
pmc: PMC8359330
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3221-3238Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Molecular Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Biodivers Data J. 2020 Jul 07;8:e55137
pubmed: 32821214
Mol Ecol. 2018 Oct;27(20):3968-3975
pubmed: 30129071
Mol Ecol Resour. 2017 Nov;17(6):e146-e159
pubmed: 28776936
Environ Sci Technol. 2015 Jul 07;49(13):7597-605
pubmed: 26052741
Mol Ecol Resour. 2017 Nov;17(6):1231-1242
pubmed: 28296259
Mol Ecol Resour. 2020 Jan;20(1):79-96
pubmed: 31484209
Mol Ecol Resour. 2016 Jan;16(1):176-82
pubmed: 25959493
Sci Total Environ. 2019 Aug 15;678:499-524
pubmed: 31077928
Mol Ecol Resour. 2019 Nov;19(6):1420-1432
pubmed: 31332947
Trends Microbiol. 2019 May;27(5):387-397
pubmed: 30554770
Mol Ecol Resour. 2014 Sep;14(5):1049-59
pubmed: 24655333
PeerJ. 2018 Jun 13;6:e4980
pubmed: 29915700
BMC Ecol. 2012 Dec 23;12:28
pubmed: 23259585
Mol Ecol. 2021 Jul;30(13):3221-3238
pubmed: 32860303
PeerJ. 2018 May 4;6:e4705
pubmed: 29740514
Mol Ecol. 2012 Apr;21(8):2039-44
pubmed: 22590728
BMC Genomics. 2010 Jul 16;11:434
pubmed: 20637073
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 22;8(4):e61217
pubmed: 23630581
Mol Ecol Resour. 2014 Nov;14(6):1160-70
pubmed: 24751203
Ecol Evol. 2019 Apr 13;9(9):5032-5048
pubmed: 31110660
Biol Lett. 2014 Sep;10(9):
pubmed: 25209199
Sci Rep. 2017 Oct 6;7(1):12777
pubmed: 28986575
PLoS One. 2019 Dec 12;14(12):e0225409
pubmed: 31830042
Sci Rep. 2018 Aug 14;8(1):12085
pubmed: 30108256
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 05;10(10):e0139633
pubmed: 26436773
Mol Ecol. 2021 Jul;30(13):3189-3202
pubmed: 32920861
PeerJ. 2016 Apr 19;4:e1966
pubmed: 27114891
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 08;10(7):e0130324
pubmed: 26154168
Sci Rep. 2018 Jul 20;8(1):10999
pubmed: 30030475
Nat Protoc. 2013 Apr;8(4):737-48
pubmed: 23493070
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 10;10(2):e0117562
pubmed: 25668035
Biotechniques. 2010 Mar;48(3):233-4
pubmed: 20359306
Ecol Evol. 2017 Jan 12;7(3):873-883
pubmed: 28168024
Mol Ecol Resour. 2019 Jul;19(4):863-876
pubmed: 30901128
Mol Ecol Resour. 2019 Nov;19(6):1516-1530
pubmed: 31379089
PLoS Comput Biol. 2017 Feb 21;13(2):e1005404
pubmed: 28222096
J Comput Biol. 2000 Feb-Apr;7(1-2):203-14
pubmed: 10890397
Ecol Evol. 2015 Jun;5(11):2252-66
pubmed: 26078860
Ecol Evol. 2017 Jul 28;7(17):6918-6926
pubmed: 28904771
Mol Ecol. 2012 Apr;21(8):2045-50
pubmed: 22486824
Sci Total Environ. 2018 Oct 1;637-638:1295-1310
pubmed: 29801222
Mol Ecol Resour. 2018 Nov;18(6):1456-1468
pubmed: 30129704
Genome. 2019 Mar;62(3):122-136
pubmed: 30457888