The precautionary principle and dietary DNA metabarcoding: Commonly used abundance thresholds change ecological interpretation

Dietary DNA metabarcoding enables researchers to identify and characterize trophic interactions with a high degree of taxonomic precision. It is also sensitive to sources of bias and contamination in the field and laboratory. One of the earliest and most common strategies for dealing with such sensitivities has been to remove all low‐abundance sequences and conduct ecological analyses based on the presence or absence of food taxa. Although this step is now often perceived to be necessary, evidence of its sufficiency is lacking and more attention to the risk of introducing other errors is needed. Using computer simulations, we demonstrate that common strategies to remove low‐abundance sequences can erroneously eliminate true dietary sequences in ways that impact downstream inferences. Using real data from well‐studied wildlife populations in Yellowstone National Park, we further show how these strategies can markedly alter the composition of dietary profiles in ways that scale‐up to obscure ecological interpretations about dietary generalism, specialism, and composition. Although the practice of removing low‐abundance sequences may continue to be a useful strategy to address research questions that focus on a subset of relatively abundant foods, its continued widespread use risks generating misleading perceptions about the structure of trophic networks. Researchers working with dietary DNA metabarcoding data—or similar data such as environmental DNA, microbiomes, or pathobiomes—should be aware of drawbacks and consider alternative bioinformatic, experimental, and statistical solutions.