Aquatic macroinvertebrate DNA barcoding

Last updated

DNA barcoding is an alternative method to the traditional morphological taxonomic classification, and has frequently been used to identify species of aquatic macroinvertebrates (generally considered those large enough to be seen without magnification). Many are crucial indicator organisms in the bioassessment of freshwater (e.g.: Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera) and marine (e.g. Annelida, Echinoderms, Molluscs) ecosystems.

Contents

Since its introduction, the field of DNA barcoding has matured to bridge the gap between traditional taxonomy and molecular systematics. This technique has the ability to provide more detailed taxonomic information, particularly for cryptic, small, or rare species. DNA barcoding involves specific targeting of gene regions that are found and conserved in most animal species, but have high variation between members of different species. Accurate diagnosis depends on low intraspecific variation compared with that between species, a short DNA sequence such as Cytochrome Subunit Oxidase I gene (COI), would allow precise allocation of an individual to a taxon.

Methodology

While the concept of using DNA sequence divergence for species discrimination has been reported earlier, Hebert et al. (2003) were pioneers in proposing standardization of DNA barcoding as a method of molecularly distinguishing species. [1]

Specimens collection for DNA barcoding does not differ from the traditional methods, apart from the fact that the samples should be preserved in high concentration (>70%) ethanol. [2] It has been indicated that the typical protocol of storing benthic samples in formalin has an adverse effect on DNA integrity. [3]

The key concept for barcoding macroinvertebrates, is proper selection of DNA markers (DNA barcode region) to amplify appropriate gene regions, using PCR techniques. The DNA barcode region needs to be ideally conserved within a species, but variable among different (even closely related) species and therefore, its sequence should serve as a species-specific genetic tag. Therefore, the selection of the marker plays an important role. [4] Cytochrome Subunit Oxidase I gene (COI) is one of the most widely used markers in barcoding of macroinvertebrates. Other markers that can be used are ribosomal RNA genes 16S and 18S.

Moreover, sorting invertebrates into different size categories is useful, since specimens in a sample can vary widely in biomass, depending on species and life stage. [5]

For further details on methods see DNA barcoding.

DNA metabarcoding

Due to the significant number of taxa that compose aquatic macroinvertebrate communities, DNA metabarcoding method is generally used to assess distinct taxa within bulk or water samples. DNA metabarcoding is a method that consists of the same workflow as DNA barcoding, distinguished by the use of high-throughput sequencing (HTS) technologies. The potential of DNA metabarcoding in the assessment and monitoring of various taxonomic groups, has been successfully demonstrated in several studies. [6] [7] Numerous researchers have used metabarcoding methods to classify benthic macroinvertebrates from tissue samples, [8] indicating its feasibility and higher sensitivity from classical taxonomy methods. Others, validate the use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies in environmental samples to evaluate water quality in marine ecosystems [9] and in freshwater biodiversity studies, [10] including macroinvertebrate species assessment. Applications of these technologies in environmental samples is constantly increasing. [11] Most of the recent studies are based on advancing eDNA approaches' implementation, field validation, platform and barcode choice or database limitations. [12]

Application and challenges

Macroinvertebrates (meta)barcoding methods are often used in:

There are also many challenges when it comes to genetic barcoding of aquatic macroinvertebrates:

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nanopore sequencing</span> DNA / RNA sequencing technique

Nanopore sequencing is a third generation approach used in the sequencing of biopolymers — specifically, polynucleotides in the form of DNA or RNA.

Freshwater ecosystems are a subset of Earth's aquatic ecosystems. They include lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, springs, bogs, and wetlands. They can be contrasted with marine ecosystems, which have a larger salt content. Freshwater habitats can be classified by different factors, including temperature, light penetration, nutrients, and vegetation. There are three basic types of freshwater ecosystems: Lentic, lotic and wetlands. Freshwater ecosystems contain 41% of the world's known fish species.

Internal transcribed spacer (ITS) is the spacer DNA situated between the small-subunit ribosomal RNA (rRNA) and large-subunit rRNA genes in the chromosome or the corresponding transcribed region in the polycistronic rRNA precursor transcript.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Metagenomics</span> Study of genes found in the environment

Metagenomics is the study of genetic material recovered directly from environmental or clinical samples by a method called sequencing. The broad field may also be referred to as environmental genomics, ecogenomics, community genomics or microbiomics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bioindicator</span> Species that reveals the status of an environment

A bioindicator is any species or group of species whose function, population, or status can reveal the qualitative status of the environment. The most common indicator species are animals. For example, copepods and other small water crustaceans that are present in many water bodies can be monitored for changes that may indicate a problem within their ecosystem. Bioindicators can tell us about the cumulative effects of different pollutants in the ecosystem and about how long a problem may have been present, which physical and chemical testing cannot.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aquatic biomonitoring</span>

Aquatic biomonitoring is the science of inferring the ecological condition of rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands by examining the organisms that live there. While aquatic biomonitoring is the most common form of biomonitoring, any ecosystem can be studied in this manner.

In biomedical contexts, a biomarker, or biological marker, is a measurable indicator of some biological state or condition. Biomarkers are often measured and evaluated using blood, urine, or soft tissues to examine normal biological processes, pathogenic processes, or pharmacologic responses to a therapeutic intervention. Biomarkers are used in many scientific fields.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Restriction site associated DNA markers</span> Type of genetic marker

Restriction site associated DNA (RAD) markers are a type of genetic marker which are useful for association mapping, QTL-mapping, population genetics, ecological genetics and evolutionary genetics. The use of RAD markers for genetic mapping is often called RAD mapping. An important aspect of RAD markers and mapping is the process of isolating RAD tags, which are the DNA sequences that immediately flank each instance of a particular restriction site of a restriction enzyme throughout the genome. Once RAD tags have been isolated, they can be used to identify and genotype DNA sequence polymorphisms mainly in form of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Polymorphisms that are identified and genotyped by isolating and analyzing RAD tags are referred to as RAD markers. Although genotyping by sequencing presents an approach similar to the RAD-seq method, they differ in some substantial ways.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">DNA barcoding</span> Method of species identification using a short section of DNA

DNA barcoding is a method of species identification using a short section of DNA from a specific gene or genes. The premise of DNA barcoding is that by comparison with a reference library of such DNA sections, an individual sequence can be used to uniquely identify an organism to species, just as a supermarket scanner uses the familiar black stripes of the UPC barcode to identify an item in its stock against its reference database. These "barcodes" are sometimes used in an effort to identify unknown species or parts of an organism, simply to catalog as many taxa as possible, or to compare with traditional taxonomy in an effort to determine species boundaries.

Community fingerprinting is a set of molecular biology techniques that can be used to quickly profile the diversity of a microbial community. Rather than directly identifying or counting individual cells in an environmental sample, these techniques show how many variants of a gene are present. In general, it is assumed that each different gene variant represents a different type of microbe. Community fingerprinting is used by microbiologists studying a variety of microbial systems to measure biodiversity or track changes in community structure over time. The method analyzes environmental samples by assaying genomic DNA. This approach offers an alternative to microbial culturing, which is important because most microbes cannot be cultured in the laboratory. Community fingerprinting does not result in identification of individual microbe species; instead, it presents an overall picture of a microbial community. These methods are now largely being replaced by high throughput sequencing, such as targeted microbiome analysis and metagenomics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental DNA</span> DNA sampled from the environment rather than directly from an individual organism

Environmental DNA or eDNA is DNA that is collected from a variety of environmental samples such as soil, seawater, snow or air, rather than directly sampled from an individual organism. As various organisms interact with the environment, DNA is expelled and accumulates in their surroundings from various sources. Such eDNA can be sequenced by environmental omics to reveal facts about the species that are present in an ecosystem — even microscopic ones not otherwise apparent or detectable.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pollen DNA barcoding</span> Process of identifying pollen donor plant species

Pollen DNA barcoding is the process of identifying pollen donor plant species through the amplification and sequencing of specific, conserved regions of plant DNA. Being able to accurately identify pollen has a wide range of applications though it has been difficult in the past due to the limitations of microscopic identification of pollen.

CITE-Seq is a method for performing RNA sequencing along with gaining quantitative and qualitative information on surface proteins with available antibodies on a single cell level. So far, the method has been demonstrated to work with only a few proteins per cell. As such, it provides an additional layer of information for the same cell by combining both proteomics and transcriptomics data. For phenotyping, this method has been shown to be as accurate as flow cytometry by the groups that developed it. It is currently one of the main methods, along with REAP-Seq, to evaluate both gene expression and protein levels simultaneously in different species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Algae DNA barcoding</span> Technique used for species identification and phylogenetic studies

DNA barcoding of algae is commonly used for species identification and phylogenetic studies. Algae form a phylogenetically heterogeneous group, meaning that the application of a single universal barcode/marker for species delimitation is unfeasible, thus different markers/barcodes are applied for this aim in different algal groups.

Microbial DNA barcoding is the use of DNA metabarcoding to characterize a mixture of microorganisms. DNA metabarcoding is a method of DNA barcoding that uses universal genetic markers to identify DNA of a mixture of organisms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fish DNA barcoding</span>

DNA barcoding methods for fish are used to identify groups of fish based on DNA sequences within selected regions of a genome. These methods can be used to study fish, as genetic material, in the form of environmental DNA (eDNA) or cells, is freely diffused in the water. This allows researchers to identify which species are present in a body of water by collecting a water sample, extracting DNA from the sample and isolating DNA sequences that are specific for the species of interest. Barcoding methods can also be used for biomonitoring and food safety validation, animal diet assessment, assessment of food webs and species distribution, and for detection of invasive species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">DNA barcoding in diet assessment</span>

DNA barcoding in diet assessment is the use of DNA barcoding to analyse the diet of organisms. and further detect and describe their trophic interactions. This approach is based on the identification of consumed species by characterization of DNA present in dietary samples, e.g. individual food remains, regurgitates, gut and fecal samples, homogenized body of the host organism, target of the diet study.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fungal DNA barcoding</span> Identification of fungal species thanks to specific DNA sequences

Fungal DNA barcoding is the process of identifying species of the biological kingdom Fungi through the amplification and sequencing of specific DNA sequences and their comparison with sequences deposited in a DNA barcode database such as the ISHAM reference database, or the Barcode of Life Data System (BOLD). In this attempt, DNA barcoding relies on universal genes that are ideally present in all fungi with the same degree of sequence variation. The interspecific variation, i.e., the variation between species, in the chosen DNA barcode gene should exceed the intraspecific (within-species) variation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Metabarcoding</span> Genetic technique for identifying organisms in mixed samples

Metabarcoding is the barcoding of DNA/RNA in a manner that allows for the simultaneous identification of many taxa within the same sample. The main difference between barcoding and metabarcoding is that metabarcoding does not focus on one specific organism, but instead aims to determine species composition within a sample.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Susie Wood</span> New Zealand microbiologist and marine scientist

Susanna Wood is a New Zealand scientist whose research focuses on understanding, protecting and restoring New Zealand's freshwater environments. One of her particular areas of expertise is the ecology, toxin production, and impacts of toxic freshwater cyanobacteria in lakes and rivers. Wood is active in advocating for the incorporation of DNA-based tools such as metabarcoding, genomics and metagenomics for characterising and understanding aquatic ecosystems and investigating the climate and anthropogenic drivers of water quality change in New Zealand lakes. She has consulted for government departments and regional authorities and co-leads a nationwide programme Lakes380 that aims to obtain an overview of the health of New Zealand's lakes using paleoenvironmental reconstructions. Wood is a senior scientist at the Cawthron Institute. She has represented New Zealand in cycling.

References

  1. Hebert, Paul D. N.; Cywinska, Alina; Ball, Shelley L.; deWaard, Jeremy R. (2003-02-07). "Biological identifications through DNA barcodes". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. 270 (1512): 313–321. doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2218. ISSN   1471-2954. PMC   1691236 . PMID   12614582.
  2. Stein, Eric D.; White, Bryan P.; Mazor, Raphael D.; Miller, Peter E.; Pilgrim, Erik M. (2013). "Evaluating Ethanol-based Sample Preservation to Facilitate Use of DNA Barcoding in Routine Freshwater Biomonitoring Programs Using Benthic Macroinvertebrates". PLOS ONE. 8 (1): e51273. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...851273S. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051273 . PMC   3537618 . PMID   23308097.
  3. Baird, Donald J.; Pascoe, Timothy J.; Zhou, Xin; Hajibabaei, Mehrdad (March 2011). "Building freshwater macroinvertebrate DNA-barcode libraries from reference collection material: formalin preservation vs specimen age". Journal of the North American Benthological Society. 30 (1): 125–130. doi:10.1899/10-013.1. ISSN   0887-3593. S2CID   3940136.
  4. Andújar, Carmelo; Arribas, Paula; Gray, Clare; Bruce, Catherine; Woodward, Guy; Yu, Douglas W.; Vogler, Alfried P. (January 2018). "Metabarcoding of freshwater invertebrates to detect the effects of a pesticide spill". Molecular Ecology. 27 (1): 146–166. Bibcode:2018MolEc..27..146A. doi:10.1111/mec.14410. hdl: 10044/1/58144 . PMID   29113023. S2CID   7697860.
  5. Elbrecht, Vasco; Peinert, Bianca; Leese, Florian (September 2017). "Sorting things out: Assessing effects of unequal specimen biomass on DNA metabarcoding". Ecology and Evolution. 7 (17): 6918–6926. Bibcode:2017EcoEv...7.6918E. doi:10.1002/ece3.3192. PMC   5587478 . PMID   28904771.
  6. Lejzerowicz, Franck; Esling, Philippe; Pillet, Loïc; Wilding, Thomas A.; Black, Kenneth D.; Pawlowski, Jan (November 2015). "High-throughput sequencing and morphology perform equally well for benthic monitoring of marine ecosystems". Scientific Reports. 5 (1): 13932. Bibcode:2015NatSR...513932L. doi:10.1038/srep13932. ISSN   2045-2322. PMC   4564730 . PMID   26355099.
  7. Elbrecht, Vasco; Vamos, Ecaterina Edith; Meissner, Kristian; Aroviita, Jukka; Leese, Florian (October 2017). Yu, Douglas (ed.). "Assessing strengths and weaknesses of DNA metabarcoding-based macroinvertebrate identification for routine stream monitoring". Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 8 (10): 1265–1275. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12789 .
  8. Carew, Melissa E; Pettigrove, Vincent J; Metzeling, Leon; Hoffmann, Ary A (2013). "Environmental monitoring using next generation sequencing: rapid identification of macroinvertebrate bioindicator species". Frontiers in Zoology. 10 (1): 45. doi: 10.1186/1742-9994-10-45 . ISSN   1742-9994. PMC   3750358 . PMID   23919569.
  9. Lejzerowicz, Franck; Esling, Philippe; Pillet, Loïc; Wilding, Thomas A.; Black, Kenneth D.; Pawlowski, Jan (November 2015). "High-throughput sequencing and morphology perform equally well for benthic monitoring of marine ecosystems". Scientific Reports. 5 (1): 13932. Bibcode:2015NatSR...513932L. doi:10.1038/srep13932. ISSN   2045-2322. PMC   4564730 . PMID   26355099.
  10. Deiner, Kristy; Fronhofer, Emanuel A.; Mächler, Elvira; Walser, Jean-Claude; Altermatt, Florian (December 2016). "Environmental DNA reveals that rivers are conveyer belts of biodiversity information". Nature Communications. 7 (1): 12544. Bibcode:2016NatCo...712544D. doi:10.1038/ncomms12544. ISSN   2041-1723. PMC   5013555 . PMID   27572523.
  11. Zaiko, Anastasija; Martinez, Jose L.; Ardura, Alba; Clusa, Laura; Borrell, Yaisel J.; Samuiloviene, Aurelija; Roca, Agustín; Garcia-Vazquez, Eva (December 2015). "Detecting nuisance species using NGST: Methodology shortcomings and possible application in ballast water monitoring" (PDF). Marine Environmental Research. 112 (Pt B): 64–72. Bibcode:2015MarER.112...64Z. doi:10.1016/j.marenvres.2015.07.002. PMID   26174116. S2CID   9579967.
  12. Fernández, Sara; Rodríguez, Saúl; Martínez, Jose L.; Borrell, Yaisel J.; Ardura, Alba; García-Vázquez, Eva (2018-08-08). Melcher, Ulrich (ed.). "Evaluating freshwater macroinvertebrates from eDNA metabarcoding: A river Nalón case study". PLOS ONE. 13 (8): e0201741. Bibcode:2018PLoSO..1301741F. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201741 . ISSN   1932-6203. PMC   6082553 . PMID   30089147.
  13. Haase, Peter; Pauls, Steffen U.; Schindehütte, Karin; Sundermann, Andrea (December 2010). "First audit of macroinvertebrate samples from an EU Water Framework Directive monitoring program: human error greatly lowers precision of assessment results". Journal of the North American Benthological Society. 29 (4): 1279–1291. doi:10.1899/09-183.1. ISSN   0887-3593. S2CID   86777562.
  14. "REABIC - Journals - BioInvasions Records - Issue 1 (2018)". www.reabic.net. doi: 10.3391/bir.2018.7.1.08 . Retrieved 2019-04-19.
  15. Venter, Hermoine J.; Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa; Bezuidenhout, Cornelius C.; Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa (2016-05-26). "DNA-based identification of aquatic invertebrates useful in the South African context?". South African Journal of Science. 112 (5/6): 4. doi: 10.17159/sajs.2016/20150444 . ISSN   0038-2353.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  16. DeWalt, R. Edward (2011-03-01). "DNA barcoding: a taxonomic point of view". Journal of the North American Benthological Society. 30 (1): 174–181. doi:10.1899/10-021.1. ISSN   0887-3593. S2CID   84203382.
  17. Carew, Melissa E; Pettigrove, Vincent J; Metzeling, Leon; Hoffmann, Ary A (2013). "Environmental monitoring using next generation sequencing: rapid identification of macroinvertebrate bioindicator species". Frontiers in Zoology. 10 (1): 45. doi: 10.1186/1742-9994-10-45 . ISSN   1742-9994. PMC   3750358 . PMID   23919569.
  18. Teletchea, Fabrice (2010-12-01). "After 7 years and 1000 citations: Comparative assessment of the DNA barcoding and the DNA taxonomy proposals for taxonomists and non-taxonomists". Mitochondrial DNA. 21 (6): 206–226. doi:10.3109/19401736.2010.532212. ISSN   1940-1736. PMID   21171865. S2CID   10486130.
  19. Rach, Jessica; Bergmann, Tjard; Paknia, Omid; DeSalle, Rob; Schierwater, Bernd; Hadrys, Heike (2017-04-13). Yue, Bi-Song (ed.). "The marker choice: Unexpected resolving power of an unexplored CO1 region for layered DNA barcoding approaches". PLOS ONE. 12 (4): e0174842. Bibcode:2017PLoSO..1274842R. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174842 . ISSN   1932-6203. PMC   5390999 . PMID   28406914.
  20. Macher, Jan N.; Salis, Romana K.; Blakemore, Katie S.; Tollrian, Ralph; Matthaei, Christoph D.; Leese, Florian (February 2016). "Multiple-stressor effects on stream invertebrates: DNA barcoding reveals contrasting responses of cryptic mayfly species". Ecological Indicators. 61: 159–169. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.08.024.
  21. Stein, Eric D.; White, Bryan P.; Mazor, Raphael D.; Jackson, John K.; Battle, Juliann M.; Miller, Peter E.; Pilgrim, Erik M.; Sweeney, Bernard W. (2014-03-01). "Does DNA barcoding improve performance of traditional stream bioassessment metrics?". Freshwater Science. 33 (1): 302–311. doi: 10.1086/674782 . ISSN   2161-9549. S2CID   67753537.
  22. Webb, Jeffrey M.; Jacobus, Luke M.; Funk, David H.; Zhou, Xin; Kondratieff, Boris; Geraci, Christy J.; DeWalt, R. Edward; Baird, Donald J.; Richard, Barton (2012-05-30). Fenton, Brock (ed.). "A DNA Barcode Library for North American Ephemeroptera: Progress and Prospects". PLOS ONE. 7 (5): e38063. Bibcode:2012PLoSO...738063W. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0038063 . ISSN   1932-6203. PMC   3364165 . PMID   22666447.