Toward an ecoregion scale evaluation of eDNA metabarcoding primers: A case study for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia)
High‐throughput sequencing of environmental DNA (i.e., eDNA metabarcoding) has become an increasingly popular method for monitoring aquatic biodiversity. At present, such analyses require target‐specific primers to amplify DNA barcodes from co‐occurring species, and this initial amplification can in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ecology and evolution 2018-09, Vol.8 (17), p.8697-8712 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 8712 |
---|---|
container_issue | 17 |
container_start_page | 8697 |
container_title | Ecology and evolution |
container_volume | 8 |
creator | Bylemans, Jonas Gleeson, Dianne M. Hardy, Christopher M. Furlan, Elise |
description | High‐throughput sequencing of environmental DNA (i.e., eDNA metabarcoding) has become an increasingly popular method for monitoring aquatic biodiversity. At present, such analyses require target‐specific primers to amplify DNA barcodes from co‐occurring species, and this initial amplification can introduce biases. Understanding the performance of different primers is thus recommended prior to undertaking any metabarcoding initiative. While multiple software programs are available to evaluate metabarcoding primers, all programs have their own strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, a robust in silico workflow for the evaluation of metabarcoding primers will benefit from the use of multiple programs. Furthermore, geographic differences in species biodiversity are likely to influence the performance of metabarcoding primers and further complicate the evaluation process. Here, an in silico workflow is presented that can be used to evaluate the performance of metabarcoding primers on an ecoregion scale. This workflow was used to evaluate the performance of published and newly developed eDNA metabarcoding primers for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia). To validate the in silico workflow, a subset of the primers, including one newly designed primer pair, were used in metabarcoding analyses of an artificial DNA community and eDNA samples. The results show that the in silico workflow allows for a robust evaluation of metabarcoding primers and can reveal important trade‐offs that need to be considered when selecting the most suitable primer. Additionally, a new primer pair was described and validated that allows for more robust taxonomic assignments and is less influenced by primer biases compared to commonly used fish metabarcoding primers.
An in silico workflow, artificial DNA communities, and eDNA samples were used to evaluate the performance of previously published and newly developed metabarcoding primers for fishes on an ecoregion scale. The results show that the in silico workflow allows for a robust evaluation of metabarcoding primers, and the newly designed primer pair is less affected by primer biases. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/ece3.4387 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6157654</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2112228241</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5097-20adf5dd3d8699b8e37f698980cdb627cfc63a0736363c4009e2d46907902a603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUFu1DAUhiMEolXpggsgS2zoYlrHTuyEBdIwHaBSgU1ZWy_284yrTFzsZEbZcYceoHfjJMRMW5UF9sKW_b3Pz_qz7HVOT3NK2Rlq5KcFr-Sz7JDRopxJWVbPn-wPsuMYr-k0BGUFlS-zA06ZzEteHWZ3V34HwRDoCGofcOV8R6KGFgluoR2gTwfeEjz_Nicb7KGBoL1x3YrcBLfBEN-TOdEQkcR-MCOxPpB-jcQGjOsd9BiIdXFNGjdVbSfe9WMSJubrEAKMv3_dnkNok_IjRNeRd_Mh9gFaByevshcW2ojH9-tR9uPT8mrxZXb5_fPFYn450yWt5YxRMLY0hptK1HVTIZdW1FVdUW0awaS2WnCgkotp6oLSGpkpRE1lTRkIyo-yD3vvzdBs0GjsUgMqfRHCqDw49e9N59Zq5bdK5KUUZTEJ3t4Lgv85YOzVtR9CN_WsWJ4zxipW5BN1sqd08DEGtI8v5FSlOFWKU6U4J_bN05YeyYfwJuBsD-xci-P_TWq5WPK_yj9dpaxq</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2112228241</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Toward an ecoregion scale evaluation of eDNA metabarcoding primers: A case study for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia)</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Bylemans, Jonas ; Gleeson, Dianne M. ; Hardy, Christopher M. ; Furlan, Elise</creator><creatorcontrib>Bylemans, Jonas ; Gleeson, Dianne M. ; Hardy, Christopher M. ; Furlan, Elise</creatorcontrib><description>High‐throughput sequencing of environmental DNA (i.e., eDNA metabarcoding) has become an increasingly popular method for monitoring aquatic biodiversity. At present, such analyses require target‐specific primers to amplify DNA barcodes from co‐occurring species, and this initial amplification can introduce biases. Understanding the performance of different primers is thus recommended prior to undertaking any metabarcoding initiative. While multiple software programs are available to evaluate metabarcoding primers, all programs have their own strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, a robust in silico workflow for the evaluation of metabarcoding primers will benefit from the use of multiple programs. Furthermore, geographic differences in species biodiversity are likely to influence the performance of metabarcoding primers and further complicate the evaluation process. Here, an in silico workflow is presented that can be used to evaluate the performance of metabarcoding primers on an ecoregion scale. This workflow was used to evaluate the performance of published and newly developed eDNA metabarcoding primers for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia). To validate the in silico workflow, a subset of the primers, including one newly designed primer pair, were used in metabarcoding analyses of an artificial DNA community and eDNA samples. The results show that the in silico workflow allows for a robust evaluation of metabarcoding primers and can reveal important trade‐offs that need to be considered when selecting the most suitable primer. Additionally, a new primer pair was described and validated that allows for more robust taxonomic assignments and is less influenced by primer biases compared to commonly used fish metabarcoding primers.
An in silico workflow, artificial DNA communities, and eDNA samples were used to evaluate the performance of previously published and newly developed metabarcoding primers for fishes on an ecoregion scale. The results show that the in silico workflow allows for a robust evaluation of metabarcoding primers, and the newly designed primer pair is less affected by primer biases.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2045-7758</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2045-7758</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ece3.4387</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30271538</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Amplification ; Bar codes ; Biodiversity ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; DNA ; DNA sequencing ; Environmental DNA ; Fish ; Freshwater fish ; high‐throughput sequencing ; in silico ; metabarcoding ; Monitoring methods ; Next-generation sequencing ; Original Research ; Performance evaluation ; Primers ; Robustness ; Software ; Workflow</subject><ispartof>Ecology and evolution, 2018-09, Vol.8 (17), p.8697-8712</ispartof><rights>2018 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2018. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5097-20adf5dd3d8699b8e37f698980cdb627cfc63a0736363c4009e2d46907902a603</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5097-20adf5dd3d8699b8e37f698980cdb627cfc63a0736363c4009e2d46907902a603</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6263-0874</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6157654/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6157654/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,1417,11562,27924,27925,45574,45575,46052,46476,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30271538$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bylemans, Jonas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gleeson, Dianne M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardy, Christopher M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furlan, Elise</creatorcontrib><title>Toward an ecoregion scale evaluation of eDNA metabarcoding primers: A case study for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia)</title><title>Ecology and evolution</title><addtitle>Ecol Evol</addtitle><description>High‐throughput sequencing of environmental DNA (i.e., eDNA metabarcoding) has become an increasingly popular method for monitoring aquatic biodiversity. At present, such analyses require target‐specific primers to amplify DNA barcodes from co‐occurring species, and this initial amplification can introduce biases. Understanding the performance of different primers is thus recommended prior to undertaking any metabarcoding initiative. While multiple software programs are available to evaluate metabarcoding primers, all programs have their own strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, a robust in silico workflow for the evaluation of metabarcoding primers will benefit from the use of multiple programs. Furthermore, geographic differences in species biodiversity are likely to influence the performance of metabarcoding primers and further complicate the evaluation process. Here, an in silico workflow is presented that can be used to evaluate the performance of metabarcoding primers on an ecoregion scale. This workflow was used to evaluate the performance of published and newly developed eDNA metabarcoding primers for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia). To validate the in silico workflow, a subset of the primers, including one newly designed primer pair, were used in metabarcoding analyses of an artificial DNA community and eDNA samples. The results show that the in silico workflow allows for a robust evaluation of metabarcoding primers and can reveal important trade‐offs that need to be considered when selecting the most suitable primer. Additionally, a new primer pair was described and validated that allows for more robust taxonomic assignments and is less influenced by primer biases compared to commonly used fish metabarcoding primers.
An in silico workflow, artificial DNA communities, and eDNA samples were used to evaluate the performance of previously published and newly developed metabarcoding primers for fishes on an ecoregion scale. The results show that the in silico workflow allows for a robust evaluation of metabarcoding primers, and the newly designed primer pair is less affected by primer biases.</description><subject>Amplification</subject><subject>Bar codes</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>DNA sequencing</subject><subject>Environmental DNA</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Freshwater fish</subject><subject>high‐throughput sequencing</subject><subject>in silico</subject><subject>metabarcoding</subject><subject>Monitoring methods</subject><subject>Next-generation sequencing</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>Primers</subject><subject>Robustness</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Workflow</subject><issn>2045-7758</issn><issn>2045-7758</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUFu1DAUhiMEolXpggsgS2zoYlrHTuyEBdIwHaBSgU1ZWy_284yrTFzsZEbZcYceoHfjJMRMW5UF9sKW_b3Pz_qz7HVOT3NK2Rlq5KcFr-Sz7JDRopxJWVbPn-wPsuMYr-k0BGUFlS-zA06ZzEteHWZ3V34HwRDoCGofcOV8R6KGFgluoR2gTwfeEjz_Nicb7KGBoL1x3YrcBLfBEN-TOdEQkcR-MCOxPpB-jcQGjOsd9BiIdXFNGjdVbSfe9WMSJubrEAKMv3_dnkNok_IjRNeRd_Mh9gFaByevshcW2ojH9-tR9uPT8mrxZXb5_fPFYn450yWt5YxRMLY0hptK1HVTIZdW1FVdUW0awaS2WnCgkotp6oLSGpkpRE1lTRkIyo-yD3vvzdBs0GjsUgMqfRHCqDw49e9N59Zq5bdK5KUUZTEJ3t4Lgv85YOzVtR9CN_WsWJ4zxipW5BN1sqd08DEGtI8v5FSlOFWKU6U4J_bN05YeyYfwJuBsD-xci-P_TWq5WPK_yj9dpaxq</recordid><startdate>201809</startdate><enddate>201809</enddate><creator>Bylemans, Jonas</creator><creator>Gleeson, Dianne M.</creator><creator>Hardy, Christopher M.</creator><creator>Furlan, Elise</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6263-0874</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201809</creationdate><title>Toward an ecoregion scale evaluation of eDNA metabarcoding primers: A case study for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia)</title><author>Bylemans, Jonas ; Gleeson, Dianne M. ; Hardy, Christopher M. ; Furlan, Elise</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5097-20adf5dd3d8699b8e37f698980cdb627cfc63a0736363c4009e2d46907902a603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Amplification</topic><topic>Bar codes</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>DNA sequencing</topic><topic>Environmental DNA</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Freshwater fish</topic><topic>high‐throughput sequencing</topic><topic>in silico</topic><topic>metabarcoding</topic><topic>Monitoring methods</topic><topic>Next-generation sequencing</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>Primers</topic><topic>Robustness</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Workflow</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bylemans, Jonas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gleeson, Dianne M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardy, Christopher M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furlan, Elise</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Ecology and evolution</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bylemans, Jonas</au><au>Gleeson, Dianne M.</au><au>Hardy, Christopher M.</au><au>Furlan, Elise</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Toward an ecoregion scale evaluation of eDNA metabarcoding primers: A case study for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia)</atitle><jtitle>Ecology and evolution</jtitle><addtitle>Ecol Evol</addtitle><date>2018-09</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>8</volume><issue>17</issue><spage>8697</spage><epage>8712</epage><pages>8697-8712</pages><issn>2045-7758</issn><eissn>2045-7758</eissn><abstract>High‐throughput sequencing of environmental DNA (i.e., eDNA metabarcoding) has become an increasingly popular method for monitoring aquatic biodiversity. At present, such analyses require target‐specific primers to amplify DNA barcodes from co‐occurring species, and this initial amplification can introduce biases. Understanding the performance of different primers is thus recommended prior to undertaking any metabarcoding initiative. While multiple software programs are available to evaluate metabarcoding primers, all programs have their own strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, a robust in silico workflow for the evaluation of metabarcoding primers will benefit from the use of multiple programs. Furthermore, geographic differences in species biodiversity are likely to influence the performance of metabarcoding primers and further complicate the evaluation process. Here, an in silico workflow is presented that can be used to evaluate the performance of metabarcoding primers on an ecoregion scale. This workflow was used to evaluate the performance of published and newly developed eDNA metabarcoding primers for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia). To validate the in silico workflow, a subset of the primers, including one newly designed primer pair, were used in metabarcoding analyses of an artificial DNA community and eDNA samples. The results show that the in silico workflow allows for a robust evaluation of metabarcoding primers and can reveal important trade‐offs that need to be considered when selecting the most suitable primer. Additionally, a new primer pair was described and validated that allows for more robust taxonomic assignments and is less influenced by primer biases compared to commonly used fish metabarcoding primers.
An in silico workflow, artificial DNA communities, and eDNA samples were used to evaluate the performance of previously published and newly developed metabarcoding primers for fishes on an ecoregion scale. The results show that the in silico workflow allows for a robust evaluation of metabarcoding primers, and the newly designed primer pair is less affected by primer biases.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>30271538</pmid><doi>10.1002/ece3.4387</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6263-0874</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2045-7758 |
ispartof | Ecology and evolution, 2018-09, Vol.8 (17), p.8697-8712 |
issn | 2045-7758 2045-7758 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6157654 |
source | Wiley Journals; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Wiley Online Library Open Access; PubMed Central |
subjects | Amplification Bar codes Biodiversity Deoxyribonucleic acid DNA DNA sequencing Environmental DNA Fish Freshwater fish high‐throughput sequencing in silico metabarcoding Monitoring methods Next-generation sequencing Original Research Performance evaluation Primers Robustness Software Workflow |
title | Toward an ecoregion scale evaluation of eDNA metabarcoding primers: A case study for the freshwater fish biodiversity of the Murray–Darling Basin (Australia) |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T13%3A02%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Toward%20an%20ecoregion%20scale%20evaluation%20of%20eDNA%20metabarcoding%20primers:%20A%20case%20study%20for%20the%20freshwater%20fish%20biodiversity%20of%20the%20Murray%E2%80%93Darling%20Basin%20(Australia)&rft.jtitle=Ecology%20and%20evolution&rft.au=Bylemans,%20Jonas&rft.date=2018-09&rft.volume=8&rft.issue=17&rft.spage=8697&rft.epage=8712&rft.pages=8697-8712&rft.issn=2045-7758&rft.eissn=2045-7758&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ece3.4387&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2112228241%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2112228241&rft_id=info:pmid/30271538&rfr_iscdi=true |