22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How much is enough? Effects of technical and biological replication on metabarcoding dietary analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          DNA metabarcoding is increasingly used in dietary studies to estimate diversity, composition and frequency of occurrence of prey items. However, few studies have assessed how technical and biological replication affect the accuracy of diet estimates. This study addresses these issues using the European free‐tailed bat Tadarida teniotis, involving high‐throughput sequencing of a small fragment of the COI gene in 15 separate faecal pellets and a 15‐pellet pool per each of 20 bats. We investigated how diet descriptors were affected by variability among (a) individuals, (b) pellets of each individual and (c) PCRs of each pellet. In addition, we investigated the impact of (d) analysing separate pellets vs. pellet pools. We found that diet diversity estimates increased steadily with the number of pellets analysed per individual, with seven pellets required to detect ~80% of prey species. Most variation in diet composition was associated with differences among individual bats, followed by pellets per individual and PCRs per pellet. The accuracy of frequency of occurrence estimates increased with the number of pellets analysed per bat, with the highest error rates recorded for prey consumed infrequently by many individuals. Pools provided poor estimates of diet diversity and frequency of occurrence, which were comparable to analysing a single pellet per individual, and consistently missed the less common prey items. Overall, our results stress that maximizing biological replication is critical in dietary metabarcoding studies and emphasize that analysing several samples per individual rather than pooled samples produce more accurate results.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            obitools: a unix-inspired software package for DNA metabarcoding.

            DNA metabarcoding offers new perspectives in biodiversity research. This recently developed approach to ecosystem study relies heavily on the use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and thus calls upon the ability to deal with huge sequence data sets. The obitools package satisfies this requirement thanks to a set of programs specifically designed for analysing NGS data in a DNA metabarcoding context. Their capacity to filter and edit sequences while taking into account taxonomic annotation helps to set up tailor-made analysis pipelines for a broad range of DNA metabarcoding applications, including biodiversity surveys or diet analyses. The obitools package is distributed as an open source software available on the following website: http://metabarcoding.org/obitools. A Galaxy wrapper is available on the GenOuest core facility toolshed: http://toolshed.genouest.org.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Replication levels, false presences and the estimation of the presence/absence from eDNA metabarcoding data.

              Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is increasingly used to study the present and past biodiversity. eDNA analyses often rely on amplification of very small quantities or degraded DNA. To avoid missing detection of taxa that are actually present (false negatives), multiple extractions and amplifications of the same samples are often performed. However, the level of replication needed for reliable estimates of the presence/absence patterns remains an unaddressed topic. Furthermore, degraded DNA and PCR/sequencing errors might produce false positives. We used simulations and empirical data to evaluate the level of replication required for accurate detection of targeted taxa in different contexts and to assess the performance of methods used to reduce the risk of false detections. Furthermore, we evaluated whether statistical approaches developed to estimate occupancy in the presence of observational errors can successfully estimate true prevalence, detection probability and false-positive rates. Replications reduced the rate of false negatives; the optimal level of replication was strongly dependent on the detection probability of taxa. Occupancy models successfully estimated true prevalence, detection probability and false-positive rates, but their performance increased with the number of replicates. At least eight PCR replicates should be performed if detection probability is not high, such as in ancient DNA studies. Multiple DNA extractions from the same sample yielded consistent results; in some cases, collecting multiple samples from the same locality allowed detecting more species. The optimal level of replication for accurate species detection strongly varies among studies and could be explicitly estimated to improve the reliability of results.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                vanessamata@cibio.up.pt
                Journal
                Mol Ecol
                Mol. Ecol
                10.1111/(ISSN)1365-294X
                MEC
                Molecular Ecology
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0962-1083
                1365-294X
                16 July 2018
                January 2019
                : 28
                : 2 , SPECIES INTERACTIONS, ECOLOGICAL NETWORKS AND COMMUNITY DYNAMICS ( doiID: 10.1111/mec.2019.28.issue-2 )
                : 165-175
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] CIBIO‐InBIO Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos Universidade do Porto Vairão Portugal
                [ 2 ] Departamento de Biologia Faculdade de Ciências Universidade do Porto Porto Portugal
                [ 3 ] CEABN‐InBIO Centro de Ecologia Aplicada “Professor Baeta Neves” Instituto Superior de Agronomia Universidade de Lisboa Lisboa Portugal
                [ 4 ] School of Biological Sciences University of Bristol Bristol UK
                [ 5 ] Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Tennessee Knoxville Tennessee
                [ 6 ] Trace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, Molecular and Life Sciences Curtin University Bentley WA Australia
                [ 7 ] Environomics Future Science Platform CSIRO National Collections and Marine Infrastructure Crawley WA Australia
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Vanessa A. Mata, CIBIO‐InBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto, 4485‐661 Vairão, Portugal.

                Email: vanessamata@ 123456cibio.up.pt

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3005-9030
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7118-4068
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7731-9242
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0792-9686
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8164-0760
                Article
                MEC14779
                10.1111/mec.14779
                7379978
                29940083
                73d446a6-cca0-4dc6-8967-7a1ed41e9024
                © 2018 The Authors. Molecular Ecology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 29 January 2018
                : 16 May 2018
                : 23 May 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 1, Pages: 11, Words: 8522
                Funding
                Funded by: EDP Energias de Portugal
                Funded by: Fundação para Ciência e Tecnologia
                Award ID: IF/00497/2013
                Award ID: LTER/BIA‐BEC/0004/2009
                Award ID: PD/BD/113462/2015
                Award ID: PD/BD/52606/2014
                Funded by: EU Horizon 2020
                Award ID: 668981
                Categories
                Special Issue: Species Interactions, Ecological Networks and Community Dynamics
                A Cornucopia of Interaction Types and Taxa
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                January 2019
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.8.5 mode:remove_FC converted:24.07.2020

                Ecology
                bat ecology,metabarcoding,molecular diet analyses,replication,sampling design,trophic ecology
                Ecology
                bat ecology, metabarcoding, molecular diet analyses, replication, sampling design, trophic ecology

                Comments

                Comment on this article