Cargando…

Benthic invertebrates in Svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment

To protect and restore ecosystems and biodiversity is one of the 10 challenges identified by the United Nations’s Decade of the Ocean Science. In this study we used eDNA from sediments collected in two fjords of the Svalbard archipelago and compared the taxonomic composition with traditional methods...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Willassen, Endre, Westgaard, Jon-Ivar, Kongsrud, Jon Anders, Hanebrekke, Tanja, Buhl-Mortensen, Pål, Holte, Børge
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9676020/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36415859
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14321
_version_ 1784833500461924352
author Willassen, Endre
Westgaard, Jon-Ivar
Kongsrud, Jon Anders
Hanebrekke, Tanja
Buhl-Mortensen, Pål
Holte, Børge
author_facet Willassen, Endre
Westgaard, Jon-Ivar
Kongsrud, Jon Anders
Hanebrekke, Tanja
Buhl-Mortensen, Pål
Holte, Børge
author_sort Willassen, Endre
collection PubMed
description To protect and restore ecosystems and biodiversity is one of the 10 challenges identified by the United Nations’s Decade of the Ocean Science. In this study we used eDNA from sediments collected in two fjords of the Svalbard archipelago and compared the taxonomic composition with traditional methods through metabarcoding, targeting mitochondrial CO1, to survey benthos. Clustering of 21.6 mill sequence reads with a d value of 13 in swarm, returned about 25 K OTU reads. An identification search with the BOLD database returned 12,000 taxonomy annotated sequences spanning a similarity range of 50% to 100%. Using an acceptance filter of minimum 90% similarity to the CO1 reference sequence, we found that 74% of the ca 100 taxon identified sequence reads were Polychaeta and 22% Nematoda. Relatively few other benthic invertebrate species were detected. Many of the identified sequence reads were extra-organismal DNA from terrestrial, planktonic, and photic zone sources. For the species rich Polychaeta, we found that, on average, only 20.6% of the species identified from morphology were also detected with DNA. This discrepancy was not due to missing reference sequences in the search database, because 90–100% (mean 96.7%) of the visually identified species at each station were represented with barcodes in Boldsystems. The volume of DNA samples is small compared with the volume searched in visual sorting, and the replicate DNA-samples in sum covered only about 2% of the surface area of a grab. This may considerably reduce the detection rate of species that are not uniformly distributed in the sediments. Along with PCR amplification bias and primer mismatch, this may be an important reason for the limited congruence of species identified with the two approaches. However, metabarcoding also identified 69 additional species that are usually overlooked in visual sample sorting, demonstrating how metabarcoding can complement traditional methodology by detecting additional, less conspicuous groups of organisms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9676020
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96760202022-11-21 Benthic invertebrates in Svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment Willassen, Endre Westgaard, Jon-Ivar Kongsrud, Jon Anders Hanebrekke, Tanja Buhl-Mortensen, Pål Holte, Børge PeerJ Biodiversity To protect and restore ecosystems and biodiversity is one of the 10 challenges identified by the United Nations’s Decade of the Ocean Science. In this study we used eDNA from sediments collected in two fjords of the Svalbard archipelago and compared the taxonomic composition with traditional methods through metabarcoding, targeting mitochondrial CO1, to survey benthos. Clustering of 21.6 mill sequence reads with a d value of 13 in swarm, returned about 25 K OTU reads. An identification search with the BOLD database returned 12,000 taxonomy annotated sequences spanning a similarity range of 50% to 100%. Using an acceptance filter of minimum 90% similarity to the CO1 reference sequence, we found that 74% of the ca 100 taxon identified sequence reads were Polychaeta and 22% Nematoda. Relatively few other benthic invertebrate species were detected. Many of the identified sequence reads were extra-organismal DNA from terrestrial, planktonic, and photic zone sources. For the species rich Polychaeta, we found that, on average, only 20.6% of the species identified from morphology were also detected with DNA. This discrepancy was not due to missing reference sequences in the search database, because 90–100% (mean 96.7%) of the visually identified species at each station were represented with barcodes in Boldsystems. The volume of DNA samples is small compared with the volume searched in visual sorting, and the replicate DNA-samples in sum covered only about 2% of the surface area of a grab. This may considerably reduce the detection rate of species that are not uniformly distributed in the sediments. Along with PCR amplification bias and primer mismatch, this may be an important reason for the limited congruence of species identified with the two approaches. However, metabarcoding also identified 69 additional species that are usually overlooked in visual sample sorting, demonstrating how metabarcoding can complement traditional methodology by detecting additional, less conspicuous groups of organisms. PeerJ Inc. 2022-11-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9676020/ /pubmed/36415859 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14321 Text en © 2022 Willassen et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Biodiversity
Willassen, Endre
Westgaard, Jon-Ivar
Kongsrud, Jon Anders
Hanebrekke, Tanja
Buhl-Mortensen, Pål
Holte, Børge
Benthic invertebrates in Svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment
title Benthic invertebrates in Svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment
title_full Benthic invertebrates in Svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment
title_fullStr Benthic invertebrates in Svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment
title_full_unstemmed Benthic invertebrates in Svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment
title_short Benthic invertebrates in Svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment
title_sort benthic invertebrates in svalbard fjords—when metabarcoding does not outperform traditional biodiversity assessment
topic Biodiversity
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9676020/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36415859
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14321
work_keys_str_mv AT willassenendre benthicinvertebratesinsvalbardfjordswhenmetabarcodingdoesnotoutperformtraditionalbiodiversityassessment
AT westgaardjonivar benthicinvertebratesinsvalbardfjordswhenmetabarcodingdoesnotoutperformtraditionalbiodiversityassessment
AT kongsrudjonanders benthicinvertebratesinsvalbardfjordswhenmetabarcodingdoesnotoutperformtraditionalbiodiversityassessment
AT hanebrekketanja benthicinvertebratesinsvalbardfjordswhenmetabarcodingdoesnotoutperformtraditionalbiodiversityassessment
AT buhlmortensenpal benthicinvertebratesinsvalbardfjordswhenmetabarcodingdoesnotoutperformtraditionalbiodiversityassessment
AT holtebørge benthicinvertebratesinsvalbardfjordswhenmetabarcodingdoesnotoutperformtraditionalbiodiversityassessment