Is it really there? Addressing Inadequate Sampling and False Detection in Environmental DNA Metabarcoding

被引:0
|
作者
Antinero, Ariel T. [1 ]
Balaba, Mayenne P. [1 ]
Leopardas, Venus E. [1 ,2 ]
Aspe, Nonillon M. [1 ,2 ]
Kajita, Tadashi [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Mindanao State Univ Naawan, Coll Marine & Allied Sci, Naawan 9023, Misamis Orienta, Philippines
[2] Mindanao State Univ Naawan, Environm DNA Res & Dev, Naawan 9023, Misamis Orienta, Philippines
[3] Univ Ryukyus, Trop Biosphere Res Ctr, Iriomote Stn, Yaeyama, Okinawa, Japan
[4] Univ Malaysia Sabah, Inst Trop Biol & Conservat, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia
来源
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT | 2024年 / 27卷 / 02期
基金
日本科学技术振兴机构; 日本学术振兴会;
关键词
biodiversity assessment; conservation management; standardized protocols; polymerase chain reaction; eDNA metabarcoding; ANCIENT DNA; EDNA; MARINE; PCR; PERSPECTIVES; COMMUNITIES; POLYMERASE; VEGETATION; FRAMEWORK; CAPTURE;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The use of environmental DNA (eDNA) for biodiversity assessment has garnered significant attention due to its cost-effectiveness, rapidity, accuracy, and noninvasiveness in acquiring data on organisms in various habitats. Despite its numerous advantages over traditional methods, there remains a pressing need for improved protocol standardization. This review synthesizes potential strategies to address false detection in eDNA metabarcoding, including inadequate sampling and limited persistence of eDNA, contamination, primer biases, inhibition of DNA amplification, differentiation of eDNA from deceased organisms, incomplete databases, and sequencing errors or poor-quality sequences. Best practices such as collecting 1 to 2 liters of surface water, replicating polymerase chain reactions (PCR), using multiple genetic markers and primers to mitigate PCR primer biases, and implementing stringent contamination controls at each analysis step are recommended. While no universal recommendations currently exist for the diverse applications of eDNA metabarcoding in species detection, adopting these measures can enhance the reliability and accuracy of results. Despite the present limitations in sequence databases and the necessity for improved primer quality and analysis pipelines, the eDNA approach is anticipated to evolve and become more standardized. This review provides practical guidance on eDNA technology for researchers, consultants, and managers, facilitating its effective use in biodiversity assessments.
引用
收藏
页数:86
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Metabarcoding of soil environmental DNA replicates plant community variation but not specificity
    Barnes, Christopher James
    Nielsen, Ida Broman
    Aagaard, Anne
    Ejrnaes, Rasmus
    Hansen, Anders Johannes
    Froslev, Tobias Guldberg
    ENVIRONMENTAL DNA, 2022, 4 (04): : 732 - 746
  • [22] Evaluating environmental DNA metabarcoding as a survey tool for unionid mussel assessments
    Marshall, Nathaniel T.
    Symonds, Daniel E.
    Dean, Cheryl A.
    Schumer, Gregg
    Fleece, William Cody
    FRESHWATER BIOLOGY, 2022, 67 (09) : 1483 - 1507
  • [23] Environmental DNA Metabarcoding Detects Predators at Higher Rates Than Electrofishing
    Bonk, Eric A.
    Hanner, Robert H.
    Bartlett, Adrienne J.
    Tetreault, Gerald R.
    ENVIRONMENTAL DNA, 2024, 6 (05):
  • [24] Non-specific amplification compromises environmental DNA metabarcoding with COI
    Collins, Rupert A.
    Bakker, Judith
    Wangensteen, Owen S.
    Soto, Ana Z.
    Corrigan, Laura
    Sims, David W.
    Genner, Martin J.
    Mariani, Stefano
    METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2019, 10 (11): : 1985 - 2001
  • [25] Systematic review of marine environmental DNA metabarcoding studies: toward best practices for data usability and accessibility
    Shea, Meghan M.
    Kuppermann, Jacob
    Rogers, Megan P.
    Smith, Dustin Summer
    Edwards, Paul
    Boehm, Alexandria B.
    PEERJ, 2023, 11
  • [26] Maximizing sampling efficiency to detect differences in fish community composition using environmental DNA metabarcoding in subarctic fjords
    Guri, Gledis
    Westgaard, Jon-Ivar
    Yoccoz, Nigel
    Wangensteen, Owen S.
    Praebel, Kim
    Ray, Jessica Louise
    Kelly, Ryan P.
    Shelton, Andrew Olaf
    Hanebrekke, Tanja
    Johansen, Torild
    ENVIRONMENTAL DNA, 2024, 6 (01):
  • [27] River benthic macroinvertebrates and environmental DNA metabarcoding: a scoping review of eDNA sampling, extraction, amplification and sequencing methods
    Vourka, Aikaterini
    Karaouzas, Ioannis
    Parmakelis, Aristeidis
    BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, 2023, 32 (13) : 4221 - 4238
  • [28] BeeDNA: Microfluidic environmental DNA metabarcoding as a tool for connecting plant and pollinator communities
    Harper, Lynsey R.
    Niemiller, Matthew L.
    Benito, Joseph B.
    Paddock, Lauren E.
    Knittle, E.
    Molano-Flores, Brenda
    Davis, Mark A.
    ENVIRONMENTAL DNA, 2023, 5 (01): : 191 - 211
  • [29] Fish diversity assessment in the headwaters of the Volga River using environmental DNA metabarcoding
    Lecaudey, Laurene A.
    Schletterer, Martin
    Kuzovlev, Vyacheslav V.
    Hahn, Christoph
    Weiss, Steven J.
    AQUATIC CONSERVATION-MARINE AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS, 2019, 29 (10) : 1785 - 1800
  • [30] Improving reliability in environmental DNA detection surveys through enhanced quality control
    Furlan, Elise M.
    Gleeson, Dianne
    MARINE AND FRESHWATER RESEARCH, 2017, 68 (02) : 388 - 395