Comparing eDNA metabarcoding and conventional pelagic netting to inform biodiversity monitoring in deep ocean environments

Abstract The performance of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding has rarely been evaluated against conventional sampling methods in deep ocean mesopelagic environments. We assessed the biodiversity patterns generated with eDNA and two co-located conventional methods, oblique midwater trawls and ve...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:ICES journal of marine science 2023-12, Vol.80 (10), p.2545-2562
Hauptverfasser: Cote, D, McClenaghan, B, Desforges, J, Fahner, N A, Hajibabaei, M, Chawarski, J, Roul, S, Singer, G, Aubry, C, Geoffroy, M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2562
container_issue 10
container_start_page 2545
container_title ICES journal of marine science
container_volume 80
creator Cote, D
McClenaghan, B
Desforges, J
Fahner, N A
Hajibabaei, M
Chawarski, J
Roul, S
Singer, G
Aubry, C
Geoffroy, M
description Abstract The performance of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding has rarely been evaluated against conventional sampling methods in deep ocean mesopelagic environments. We assessed the biodiversity patterns generated with eDNA and two co-located conventional methods, oblique midwater trawls and vertical multinets, to compare regional and sample-level diversity. We then assessed the concordance of ecological patterns across water column habitats and evaluated how DNA markers and the level of sampling effort influenced the inferred community. We found eDNA metabarcoding characterized regional diversity well, detecting more taxa while identifying similar ecological patterns as conventional samples. Within sampling locations, eDNA metabarcoding rarely detected taxa across more than one replicate. While more taxa were found in eDNA than oblique midwater trawls within sample stations, fewer were found compared to vertical multinets. Our simulations show greater eDNA sampling effort would improve concordance with conventional methods. We also observed that using taxonomic data from multiple markers generated ecological patterns most similar to those observed with conventional methods. Patterns observed with Exact Sequence Variants were more stable across markers suggesting they are more powerful for detecting change. eDNA metabarcoding is a valuable tool for identifying and monitoring biological hotspots but some methodological adjustments are recommended for deep ocean environments.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/icesjms/fsad169
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>oup_crist</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_cristin_nora_10037_31727</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/icesjms/fsad169</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/icesjms/fsad169</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-7858dfcb8f325a300a821ba02790982c81c081775b4028138344ec074ec493643</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEFLAzEQhYMoWKtnj-YsrE022SY5lmpVKHrR85LNzpaUbrIksVB_vVlbz55meHzvMfMQuqXkgRLFZtZA3PZx1kXd0rk6Q5MsV4UqpTof94oXjDJ1ia5i3BJCBJ-TCfpe-n7QwboNhse3Be4h6UYH49tR0q7Fxrs9uGS90zs8wE5vrMEOUhqB5LF1nQ89bmy27CFEmw64984m_5tqHW4BBuwNaIfB7W3wrs-B8RpddHoX4eY0p-hz9fSxfCnW78-vy8W6MIzTVAhZybYzjexYWWlGiJYlbTQphSJKlkZSQyQVomo4KSVlknEOJr8Hhis252yK7o65JtiYr66dD7qmhDBRMypKkYnZH-FjDNDVQ7C9DodM1WO59anc-lRudtwfHf5r-Bf-ATypf30</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparing eDNA metabarcoding and conventional pelagic netting to inform biodiversity monitoring in deep ocean environments</title><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><source>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</source><source>Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Cote, D ; McClenaghan, B ; Desforges, J ; Fahner, N A ; Hajibabaei, M ; Chawarski, J ; Roul, S ; Singer, G ; Aubry, C ; Geoffroy, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Cote, D ; McClenaghan, B ; Desforges, J ; Fahner, N A ; Hajibabaei, M ; Chawarski, J ; Roul, S ; Singer, G ; Aubry, C ; Geoffroy, M</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract The performance of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding has rarely been evaluated against conventional sampling methods in deep ocean mesopelagic environments. We assessed the biodiversity patterns generated with eDNA and two co-located conventional methods, oblique midwater trawls and vertical multinets, to compare regional and sample-level diversity. We then assessed the concordance of ecological patterns across water column habitats and evaluated how DNA markers and the level of sampling effort influenced the inferred community. We found eDNA metabarcoding characterized regional diversity well, detecting more taxa while identifying similar ecological patterns as conventional samples. Within sampling locations, eDNA metabarcoding rarely detected taxa across more than one replicate. While more taxa were found in eDNA than oblique midwater trawls within sample stations, fewer were found compared to vertical multinets. Our simulations show greater eDNA sampling effort would improve concordance with conventional methods. We also observed that using taxonomic data from multiple markers generated ecological patterns most similar to those observed with conventional methods. Patterns observed with Exact Sequence Variants were more stable across markers suggesting they are more powerful for detecting change. eDNA metabarcoding is a valuable tool for identifying and monitoring biological hotspots but some methodological adjustments are recommended for deep ocean environments.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1054-3139</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1095-9289</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-9289</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsad169</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>ICES journal of marine science, 2023-12, Vol.80 (10), p.2545-2562</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. 2023</rights><rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-7858dfcb8f325a300a821ba02790982c81c081775b4028138344ec074ec493643</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-7858dfcb8f325a300a821ba02790982c81c081775b4028138344ec074ec493643</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2633-5565 ; 0000-0001-5107-2037 ; 0000-0001-8089-4013 ; 0000-0002-5805-5077</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,860,881,1598,26544,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cote, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McClenaghan, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Desforges, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fahner, N A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hajibabaei, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chawarski, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roul, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singer, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aubry, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geoffroy, M</creatorcontrib><title>Comparing eDNA metabarcoding and conventional pelagic netting to inform biodiversity monitoring in deep ocean environments</title><title>ICES journal of marine science</title><description>Abstract The performance of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding has rarely been evaluated against conventional sampling methods in deep ocean mesopelagic environments. We assessed the biodiversity patterns generated with eDNA and two co-located conventional methods, oblique midwater trawls and vertical multinets, to compare regional and sample-level diversity. We then assessed the concordance of ecological patterns across water column habitats and evaluated how DNA markers and the level of sampling effort influenced the inferred community. We found eDNA metabarcoding characterized regional diversity well, detecting more taxa while identifying similar ecological patterns as conventional samples. Within sampling locations, eDNA metabarcoding rarely detected taxa across more than one replicate. While more taxa were found in eDNA than oblique midwater trawls within sample stations, fewer were found compared to vertical multinets. Our simulations show greater eDNA sampling effort would improve concordance with conventional methods. We also observed that using taxonomic data from multiple markers generated ecological patterns most similar to those observed with conventional methods. Patterns observed with Exact Sequence Variants were more stable across markers suggesting they are more powerful for detecting change. eDNA metabarcoding is a valuable tool for identifying and monitoring biological hotspots but some methodological adjustments are recommended for deep ocean environments.</description><issn>1054-3139</issn><issn>1095-9289</issn><issn>1095-9289</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>TOX</sourceid><sourceid>3HK</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkEFLAzEQhYMoWKtnj-YsrE022SY5lmpVKHrR85LNzpaUbrIksVB_vVlbz55meHzvMfMQuqXkgRLFZtZA3PZx1kXd0rk6Q5MsV4UqpTof94oXjDJ1ia5i3BJCBJ-TCfpe-n7QwboNhse3Be4h6UYH49tR0q7Fxrs9uGS90zs8wE5vrMEOUhqB5LF1nQ89bmy27CFEmw64984m_5tqHW4BBuwNaIfB7W3wrs-B8RpddHoX4eY0p-hz9fSxfCnW78-vy8W6MIzTVAhZybYzjexYWWlGiJYlbTQphSJKlkZSQyQVomo4KSVlknEOJr8Hhis252yK7o65JtiYr66dD7qmhDBRMypKkYnZH-FjDNDVQ7C9DodM1WO59anc-lRudtwfHf5r-Bf-ATypf30</recordid><startdate>20231221</startdate><enddate>20231221</enddate><creator>Cote, D</creator><creator>McClenaghan, B</creator><creator>Desforges, J</creator><creator>Fahner, N A</creator><creator>Hajibabaei, M</creator><creator>Chawarski, J</creator><creator>Roul, S</creator><creator>Singer, G</creator><creator>Aubry, C</creator><creator>Geoffroy, M</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>TOX</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3HK</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2633-5565</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5107-2037</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8089-4013</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5805-5077</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231221</creationdate><title>Comparing eDNA metabarcoding and conventional pelagic netting to inform biodiversity monitoring in deep ocean environments</title><author>Cote, D ; McClenaghan, B ; Desforges, J ; Fahner, N A ; Hajibabaei, M ; Chawarski, J ; Roul, S ; Singer, G ; Aubry, C ; Geoffroy, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-7858dfcb8f325a300a821ba02790982c81c081775b4028138344ec074ec493643</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cote, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McClenaghan, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Desforges, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fahner, N A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hajibabaei, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chawarski, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roul, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singer, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aubry, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geoffroy, M</creatorcontrib><collection>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</collection><jtitle>ICES journal of marine science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cote, D</au><au>McClenaghan, B</au><au>Desforges, J</au><au>Fahner, N A</au><au>Hajibabaei, M</au><au>Chawarski, J</au><au>Roul, S</au><au>Singer, G</au><au>Aubry, C</au><au>Geoffroy, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparing eDNA metabarcoding and conventional pelagic netting to inform biodiversity monitoring in deep ocean environments</atitle><jtitle>ICES journal of marine science</jtitle><date>2023-12-21</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>80</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2545</spage><epage>2562</epage><pages>2545-2562</pages><issn>1054-3139</issn><issn>1095-9289</issn><eissn>1095-9289</eissn><abstract>Abstract The performance of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding has rarely been evaluated against conventional sampling methods in deep ocean mesopelagic environments. We assessed the biodiversity patterns generated with eDNA and two co-located conventional methods, oblique midwater trawls and vertical multinets, to compare regional and sample-level diversity. We then assessed the concordance of ecological patterns across water column habitats and evaluated how DNA markers and the level of sampling effort influenced the inferred community. We found eDNA metabarcoding characterized regional diversity well, detecting more taxa while identifying similar ecological patterns as conventional samples. Within sampling locations, eDNA metabarcoding rarely detected taxa across more than one replicate. While more taxa were found in eDNA than oblique midwater trawls within sample stations, fewer were found compared to vertical multinets. Our simulations show greater eDNA sampling effort would improve concordance with conventional methods. We also observed that using taxonomic data from multiple markers generated ecological patterns most similar to those observed with conventional methods. Patterns observed with Exact Sequence Variants were more stable across markers suggesting they are more powerful for detecting change. eDNA metabarcoding is a valuable tool for identifying and monitoring biological hotspots but some methodological adjustments are recommended for deep ocean environments.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/icesjms/fsad169</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2633-5565</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5107-2037</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8089-4013</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5805-5077</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1054-3139
ispartof ICES journal of marine science, 2023-12, Vol.80 (10), p.2545-2562
issn 1054-3139
1095-9289
1095-9289
language eng
recordid cdi_cristin_nora_10037_31727
source Oxford Journals Open Access Collection; NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives; Directory of Open Access Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection; EZB Electronic Journals Library
title Comparing eDNA metabarcoding and conventional pelagic netting to inform biodiversity monitoring in deep ocean environments
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T15%3A56%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup_crist&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing%20eDNA%20metabarcoding%20and%20conventional%20pelagic%20netting%20to%20inform%20biodiversity%20monitoring%20in%20deep%20ocean%20environments&rft.jtitle=ICES%20journal%20of%20marine%20science&rft.au=Cote,%20D&rft.date=2023-12-21&rft.volume=80&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2545&rft.epage=2562&rft.pages=2545-2562&rft.issn=1054-3139&rft.eissn=1095-9289&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad169&rft_dat=%3Coup_crist%3E10.1093/icesjms/fsad169%3C/oup_crist%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/icesjms/fsad169&rfr_iscdi=true