Cargando…
Utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: Effects of sampling, storage, and DNA extraction methods
DNA sequencing technologies continue to advance the biological sciences, expanding opportunities for genomic studies of non‐model organisms for basic and applied questions. Despite these opportunities, many next generation sequencing protocols have been developed assuming a substantial quantity of h...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6953651/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31938475 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5756 |
_version_ | 1783486653854121984 |
---|---|
author | Ballare, Kimberly M. Pope, Nathaniel S. Castilla, Antonio R. Cusser, Sarah Metz, Richard P. Jha, Shalene |
author_facet | Ballare, Kimberly M. Pope, Nathaniel S. Castilla, Antonio R. Cusser, Sarah Metz, Richard P. Jha, Shalene |
author_sort | Ballare, Kimberly M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | DNA sequencing technologies continue to advance the biological sciences, expanding opportunities for genomic studies of non‐model organisms for basic and applied questions. Despite these opportunities, many next generation sequencing protocols have been developed assuming a substantial quantity of high molecular weight DNA (>100 ng), which can be difficult to obtain for many study systems. In particular, the ability to sequence field‐collected specimens that exhibit varying levels of DNA degradation remains largely unexplored. In this study we investigate the influence of five traditional insect capture and curation methods on Double‐Digest Restriction Enzyme Associated DNA (ddRAD) sequencing success for three wild bee species. We sequenced a total of 105 specimens (between 7–13 specimens per species and treatment). We additionally investigated how different DNA quality metrics (including pre‐sequence concentration and contamination) predicted downstream sequencing success, and also compared two DNA extraction methods. We report successful library preparation for all specimens, with all treatments and extraction methods producing enough highly reliable loci for population genetic analyses. Although results varied between species, we found that specimens collected by net sampling directly into 100% EtOH, or by passive trapping followed by 100% EtOH storage before pinning tended to produce higher quality ddRAD assemblies, likely as a result of rapid specimen desiccation. Surprisingly, we found that specimens preserved in propylene glycol during field sampling exhibited lower‐quality assemblies. We provide recommendations for each treatment, extraction method, and DNA quality assessment, and further encourage researchers to consider utilizing a wider variety of specimens for genomic analyses. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6953651 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69536512020-01-14 Utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: Effects of sampling, storage, and DNA extraction methods Ballare, Kimberly M. Pope, Nathaniel S. Castilla, Antonio R. Cusser, Sarah Metz, Richard P. Jha, Shalene Ecol Evol Original Research DNA sequencing technologies continue to advance the biological sciences, expanding opportunities for genomic studies of non‐model organisms for basic and applied questions. Despite these opportunities, many next generation sequencing protocols have been developed assuming a substantial quantity of high molecular weight DNA (>100 ng), which can be difficult to obtain for many study systems. In particular, the ability to sequence field‐collected specimens that exhibit varying levels of DNA degradation remains largely unexplored. In this study we investigate the influence of five traditional insect capture and curation methods on Double‐Digest Restriction Enzyme Associated DNA (ddRAD) sequencing success for three wild bee species. We sequenced a total of 105 specimens (between 7–13 specimens per species and treatment). We additionally investigated how different DNA quality metrics (including pre‐sequence concentration and contamination) predicted downstream sequencing success, and also compared two DNA extraction methods. We report successful library preparation for all specimens, with all treatments and extraction methods producing enough highly reliable loci for population genetic analyses. Although results varied between species, we found that specimens collected by net sampling directly into 100% EtOH, or by passive trapping followed by 100% EtOH storage before pinning tended to produce higher quality ddRAD assemblies, likely as a result of rapid specimen desiccation. Surprisingly, we found that specimens preserved in propylene glycol during field sampling exhibited lower‐quality assemblies. We provide recommendations for each treatment, extraction method, and DNA quality assessment, and further encourage researchers to consider utilizing a wider variety of specimens for genomic analyses. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6953651/ /pubmed/31938475 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5756 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Ballare, Kimberly M. Pope, Nathaniel S. Castilla, Antonio R. Cusser, Sarah Metz, Richard P. Jha, Shalene Utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: Effects of sampling, storage, and DNA extraction methods |
title | Utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: Effects of sampling, storage, and DNA extraction methods |
title_full | Utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: Effects of sampling, storage, and DNA extraction methods |
title_fullStr | Utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: Effects of sampling, storage, and DNA extraction methods |
title_full_unstemmed | Utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: Effects of sampling, storage, and DNA extraction methods |
title_short | Utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: Effects of sampling, storage, and DNA extraction methods |
title_sort | utilizing field collected insects for next generation sequencing: effects of sampling, storage, and dna extraction methods |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6953651/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31938475 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5756 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ballarekimberlym utilizingfieldcollectedinsectsfornextgenerationsequencingeffectsofsamplingstorageanddnaextractionmethods AT popenathaniels utilizingfieldcollectedinsectsfornextgenerationsequencingeffectsofsamplingstorageanddnaextractionmethods AT castillaantonior utilizingfieldcollectedinsectsfornextgenerationsequencingeffectsofsamplingstorageanddnaextractionmethods AT cussersarah utilizingfieldcollectedinsectsfornextgenerationsequencingeffectsofsamplingstorageanddnaextractionmethods AT metzrichardp utilizingfieldcollectedinsectsfornextgenerationsequencingeffectsofsamplingstorageanddnaextractionmethods AT jhashalene utilizingfieldcollectedinsectsfornextgenerationsequencingeffectsofsamplingstorageanddnaextractionmethods |