Cargando…

Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing demand for rapid biodiversity assessment tools that have a broad taxonomic coverage. Here we evaluate a suite of environmental DNA (eDNA) markers coupled with next generation sequencing (NGS) that span the tree of life, comparing them with traditional biodiversity...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Drummond, Alexei J., Newcomb, Richard D., Buckley, Thomas R., Xie, Dong, Dopheide, Andrew, Potter, Benjamin CM, Heled, Joseph, Ross, Howard A., Tooman, Leah, Grosser, Stefanie, Park, Duckchul, Demetras, Nicholas J., Stevens, Mark I., Russell, James C., Anderson, Sandra H., Carter, Anna, Nelson, Nicola
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4595072/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26445670
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13742-015-0086-1
_version_ 1782393530624245760
author Drummond, Alexei J.
Newcomb, Richard D.
Buckley, Thomas R.
Xie, Dong
Dopheide, Andrew
Potter, Benjamin CM
Heled, Joseph
Ross, Howard A.
Tooman, Leah
Grosser, Stefanie
Park, Duckchul
Demetras, Nicholas J.
Stevens, Mark I.
Russell, James C.
Anderson, Sandra H.
Carter, Anna
Nelson, Nicola
author_facet Drummond, Alexei J.
Newcomb, Richard D.
Buckley, Thomas R.
Xie, Dong
Dopheide, Andrew
Potter, Benjamin CM
Heled, Joseph
Ross, Howard A.
Tooman, Leah
Grosser, Stefanie
Park, Duckchul
Demetras, Nicholas J.
Stevens, Mark I.
Russell, James C.
Anderson, Sandra H.
Carter, Anna
Nelson, Nicola
author_sort Drummond, Alexei J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is an increasing demand for rapid biodiversity assessment tools that have a broad taxonomic coverage. Here we evaluate a suite of environmental DNA (eDNA) markers coupled with next generation sequencing (NGS) that span the tree of life, comparing them with traditional biodiversity monitoring tools within ten 20×20 meter plots along a 700 meter elevational gradient. RESULTS: From six eDNA datasets (one from each of 16S, 18S, ITS, trnL and two from COI) we identified sequences from 109 NCBI taxonomy-defined phyla or equivalent, ranging from 31 to 60 for a given eDNA marker. Estimates of alpha and gamma diversity were sensitive to the number of sequence reads, whereas beta diversity estimates were less sensitive. The average within-plot beta diversity was lower than between plots for all markers. The soil beta diversity of COI and 18S markers showed the strongest response to the elevational variation of the eDNA markers (COI: r=0.49, p<0.001; 18S: r=0.48, p<0.001). Furthermore pairwise beta diversities for these two markers were strongly correlated with those calculated from traditional vegetation and invertebrate biodiversity measures. CONCLUSIONS: Using a soil-based eDNA approach, we demonstrate that standard phylogenetic markers are capable of recovering sequences from a broad diversity of eukaryotes, in addition to prokaryotes by 16S. The COI and 18S eDNA markers are the best proxies for aboveground biodiversity based on the high correlation between the pairwise beta diversities of these markers and those obtained using traditional methods. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13742-015-0086-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4595072
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45950722015-10-07 Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment Drummond, Alexei J. Newcomb, Richard D. Buckley, Thomas R. Xie, Dong Dopheide, Andrew Potter, Benjamin CM Heled, Joseph Ross, Howard A. Tooman, Leah Grosser, Stefanie Park, Duckchul Demetras, Nicholas J. Stevens, Mark I. Russell, James C. Anderson, Sandra H. Carter, Anna Nelson, Nicola Gigascience Research BACKGROUND: There is an increasing demand for rapid biodiversity assessment tools that have a broad taxonomic coverage. Here we evaluate a suite of environmental DNA (eDNA) markers coupled with next generation sequencing (NGS) that span the tree of life, comparing them with traditional biodiversity monitoring tools within ten 20×20 meter plots along a 700 meter elevational gradient. RESULTS: From six eDNA datasets (one from each of 16S, 18S, ITS, trnL and two from COI) we identified sequences from 109 NCBI taxonomy-defined phyla or equivalent, ranging from 31 to 60 for a given eDNA marker. Estimates of alpha and gamma diversity were sensitive to the number of sequence reads, whereas beta diversity estimates were less sensitive. The average within-plot beta diversity was lower than between plots for all markers. The soil beta diversity of COI and 18S markers showed the strongest response to the elevational variation of the eDNA markers (COI: r=0.49, p<0.001; 18S: r=0.48, p<0.001). Furthermore pairwise beta diversities for these two markers were strongly correlated with those calculated from traditional vegetation and invertebrate biodiversity measures. CONCLUSIONS: Using a soil-based eDNA approach, we demonstrate that standard phylogenetic markers are capable of recovering sequences from a broad diversity of eukaryotes, in addition to prokaryotes by 16S. The COI and 18S eDNA markers are the best proxies for aboveground biodiversity based on the high correlation between the pairwise beta diversities of these markers and those obtained using traditional methods. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13742-015-0086-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4595072/ /pubmed/26445670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13742-015-0086-1 Text en © Drummond et al. 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Drummond, Alexei J.
Newcomb, Richard D.
Buckley, Thomas R.
Xie, Dong
Dopheide, Andrew
Potter, Benjamin CM
Heled, Joseph
Ross, Howard A.
Tooman, Leah
Grosser, Stefanie
Park, Duckchul
Demetras, Nicholas J.
Stevens, Mark I.
Russell, James C.
Anderson, Sandra H.
Carter, Anna
Nelson, Nicola
Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment
title Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment
title_full Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment
title_fullStr Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment
title_short Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment
title_sort evaluating a multigene environmental dna approach for biodiversity assessment
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4595072/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26445670
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13742-015-0086-1
work_keys_str_mv AT drummondalexeij evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT newcombrichardd evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT buckleythomasr evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT xiedong evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT dopheideandrew evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT potterbenjamincm evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT heledjoseph evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT rosshowarda evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT toomanleah evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT grosserstefanie evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT parkduckchul evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT demetrasnicholasj evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT stevensmarki evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT russelljamesc evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT andersonsandrah evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT carteranna evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment
AT nelsonnicola evaluatingamultigeneenvironmentaldnaapproachforbiodiversityassessment