Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.

Biomonitoring programs have evolved beyond the sole use of morphological identification to determine the composition of invertebrate species assemblages in an array of ecosystems. The application of DNA metabarcoding in freshwater systems for assessing benthic invertebrate communities is now being e...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mehrdad Hajibabaei, Teresita M Porter, Chloe V Robinson, Donald J Baird, Shadi Shokralla, Michael T G Wright
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225409
id doaj-8244fe8b6a684913a1b5e7b28cb974af
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8244fe8b6a684913a1b5e7b28cb974af2021-03-03T21:16:08ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-011412e022540910.1371/journal.pone.0225409Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.Mehrdad HajibabaeiTeresita M PorterChloe V RobinsonDonald J BairdShadi ShokrallaMichael T G WrightBiomonitoring programs have evolved beyond the sole use of morphological identification to determine the composition of invertebrate species assemblages in an array of ecosystems. The application of DNA metabarcoding in freshwater systems for assessing benthic invertebrate communities is now being employed to generate biological information for environmental monitoring and assessment. A possible shift from the extraction of DNA from net-collected bulk benthic samples to its extraction directly from water samples for metabarcoding has generated considerable interest based on the assumption that taxon detectability is comparable when using either method. To test this, we studied paired water and benthos samples from a taxon-rich wetland complex, to investigate differences in the detection of arthropod taxa from each sample type. We demonstrate that metabarcoding of DNA extracted directly from water samples is a poor surrogate for DNA extracted from bulk benthic samples, focusing on key bioindicator groups. Our results continue to support the use of bulk benthic samples as a basis for metabarcoding-based biomonitoring, with nearly three times greater total richness in benthic samples compared to water samples. We also demonstrated that few arthropod taxa are shared between collection methods, with a notable lack of key bioindicator EPTO taxa in the water samples. Although species coverage in water could likely be improved through increased sample replication and/or increased sequencing depth, benthic samples remain the most representative, cost-effective method of generating aquatic compositional information via metabarcoding.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225409
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Mehrdad Hajibabaei
Teresita M Porter
Chloe V Robinson
Donald J Baird
Shadi Shokralla
Michael T G Wright
spellingShingle Mehrdad Hajibabaei
Teresita M Porter
Chloe V Robinson
Donald J Baird
Shadi Shokralla
Michael T G Wright
Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Mehrdad Hajibabaei
Teresita M Porter
Chloe V Robinson
Donald J Baird
Shadi Shokralla
Michael T G Wright
author_sort Mehrdad Hajibabaei
title Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.
title_short Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.
title_full Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.
title_fullStr Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.
title_full_unstemmed Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.
title_sort watered-down biodiversity? a comparison of metabarcoding results from dna extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Biomonitoring programs have evolved beyond the sole use of morphological identification to determine the composition of invertebrate species assemblages in an array of ecosystems. The application of DNA metabarcoding in freshwater systems for assessing benthic invertebrate communities is now being employed to generate biological information for environmental monitoring and assessment. A possible shift from the extraction of DNA from net-collected bulk benthic samples to its extraction directly from water samples for metabarcoding has generated considerable interest based on the assumption that taxon detectability is comparable when using either method. To test this, we studied paired water and benthos samples from a taxon-rich wetland complex, to investigate differences in the detection of arthropod taxa from each sample type. We demonstrate that metabarcoding of DNA extracted directly from water samples is a poor surrogate for DNA extracted from bulk benthic samples, focusing on key bioindicator groups. Our results continue to support the use of bulk benthic samples as a basis for metabarcoding-based biomonitoring, with nearly three times greater total richness in benthic samples compared to water samples. We also demonstrated that few arthropod taxa are shared between collection methods, with a notable lack of key bioindicator EPTO taxa in the water samples. Although species coverage in water could likely be improved through increased sample replication and/or increased sequencing depth, benthic samples remain the most representative, cost-effective method of generating aquatic compositional information via metabarcoding.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225409
work_keys_str_mv AT mehrdadhajibabaei watereddownbiodiversityacomparisonofmetabarcodingresultsfromdnaextractedfrommatchedwaterandbulktissuebiomonitoringsamples
AT teresitamporter watereddownbiodiversityacomparisonofmetabarcodingresultsfromdnaextractedfrommatchedwaterandbulktissuebiomonitoringsamples
AT chloevrobinson watereddownbiodiversityacomparisonofmetabarcodingresultsfromdnaextractedfrommatchedwaterandbulktissuebiomonitoringsamples
AT donaldjbaird watereddownbiodiversityacomparisonofmetabarcodingresultsfromdnaextractedfrommatchedwaterandbulktissuebiomonitoringsamples
AT shadishokralla watereddownbiodiversityacomparisonofmetabarcodingresultsfromdnaextractedfrommatchedwaterandbulktissuebiomonitoringsamples
AT michaeltgwright watereddownbiodiversityacomparisonofmetabarcodingresultsfromdnaextractedfrommatchedwaterandbulktissuebiomonitoringsamples
_version_ 1714817833508012032