Comparison of morphological and next generation DNA sequencing methods for assessing zooplankton assemblages

被引:44
|
作者
Harvey, Julio B. J. [1 ]
Johnson, Shannon B. [1 ]
Fisher, Jennifer L. [2 ]
Peterson, William T. [3 ]
Vrijenhoek, Robert C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Monterey Bay Aquarium Res Inst, 7700 Sandholdt Rd, Moss Landing, CA 95039 USA
[2] Cooperat Inst Marine Resources Studies, 2030 SE Marine Sci Dr, Newport, OR 97365 USA
[3] NOAA, Northwest Fisheries Sci Ctr, 2725 Montlake Blvd East, Seattle, WA 98112 USA
关键词
Zooplanlcton; Taxonomy; Morphology; Next generation DNA sequencing; COI; 28S; NORTHERN CALIFORNIA CURRENT; COASTAL UPWELLING SYSTEM; EARLY-LIFE HISTORY; EL-NINO; NEARSHORE RETENTION; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; OREGON COAST; MARINE; LARVAE; DIVERSITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jembe.2016.12.002
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Morphological taxonomic methods are currently insufficient to satisfy the rising demand for taxonomic information and rapid sample turnover required to support conservation and resource management efforts. Next generation DNA sequencing (NGS) is capable of rapidly producing taxonomic assessments for a broad diversity of organisms present in environmental samples. To achieve taxonomic coverage of similar breadth, multiple morphologists who tend to specialize by taxonomic group would be required. Unfortunately, both morphological and molecular approaches are subject to various methodological biases. Accurate assessment (both taxonomic composition and abundances) of marine zooplankton assemblages is a critical component of effective ecosystem-based conservation and resource management efforts. To address this need and determine the extent of agreement between methods, morphological data was compared to 454 NGS results for zooplankton assemblages collected in plankton net tows from northern Monterey Bay, California. Results indicate areas of agreement between data sets, but also characterize biases specific to each method. Morphological analyses provided life history stage and biomass information for many zooplankton taxa. The NGS data included 313 bp from the 3' end of the mitochondrial cytochrome-c-oxidase subunit-I (COI; 3234 OTUs) region and 365 bp from the 5' end of the large subunit of the nuclear ribosomal RNA (28S; 1669 OTUs). Results of NGS analysis corroborated the presence of 40 of the 61 morphologically identified genera and species. For some organisms, NGS provided finer taxonomic resolution where morphological data or knowledge was limited. Correlations between biomass and NGS percent sequence abundances were significant for some, but not all taxa, and were gene-specific in some cases (i.e., COI-Diplostraca, Polychaeta, Callianassidae, Clausocalanidae, Oncaeidae, Podonidae, Evadne, Neottypaea, Oncaea, Podon, Psuedocalanus; 28S-Euphausiacea, Euphausiidae, Oncaeidae, Oncaea). Despite various methodological biases, both data sets were in agreement with respect to alpha diversity indices generated for zooplankton assemblages collected at four sampling stations. These results suggest that a partnership between morphological and molecular methods represents a powerful tool, that when used appropriately, can effectively extend taxonomic assessment capabilities to better address present needs. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:113 / 126
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Next Generation Sequencing Reveals the Hidden Diversity of Zooplankton Assemblages
    Lindeque, Penelope K.
    Parry, Helen E.
    Harmer, Rachel A.
    Somerfield, Paul J.
    Atkinson, Angus
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (11):
  • [2] Comparison of DNA Quantification Methods for Next Generation Sequencing
    Jérôme D. Robin
    Andrew T. Ludlow
    Ryan LaRanger
    Woodring E. Wright
    Jerry W. Shay
    Scientific Reports, 6
  • [3] Comparison of DNA Quantification Methods for Next Generation Sequencing
    Robin, Jerome D.
    Ludlow, Andrew T.
    LaRanger, Ryan
    Wright, Woodring E.
    Shay, Jerry W.
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2016, 6
  • [4] Comparison of mango genomic DNA isolation methods for next generation sequencing
    Sharma, Nimisha
    Singh, A. K.
    Srivastav, Manish
    Singh, B. P.
    Mahto, A. K.
    Singh, N. K.
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE, 2014, 71 (02) : 260 - 263
  • [5] Next-generation DNA sequencing methods
    Mardis, Elaine R.
    ANNUAL REVIEW OF GENOMICS AND HUMAN GENETICS, 2008, 9 : 387 - 402
  • [6] Assessing impacts of DNA extraction methods on next generation sequencing of water and wastewater samples
    Walden, Connie
    Carbonero, Franck
    Zhang, Wen
    JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS, 2017, 141 : 10 - 16
  • [7] Assessing the Performance of Dried-Blood-Spot DNA Extraction Methods in Next Generation Sequencing
    Hendrix, Miyono M.
    Cuthbert, Carla D.
    Cordovado, Suzanne K.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NEONATAL SCREENING, 2020, 6 (02)
  • [8] Assessing Nanopore Sequencing for Clinical Diagnostics: a Comparison of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) Methods for Mycobacterium tuberculosis
    Smith, Carol
    Halse, Tanya A.
    Shea, Joseph
    Modestil, Herns
    Fowler, Randal C.
    Musser, Kimberlee A.
    Escuyer, Vincent
    Lapierre, Pascal
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2021, 59 (01)
  • [9] Comparison of the experimental methods in haplotype sequencing via next generation sequencing
    Jing Tu
    Na Lu
    Mengqin Duan
    An Ju
    Xiao Sun
    Zuhong Lu
    Quantitative Biology, 2016, 4 (02) : 106 - 114
  • [10] Comparison of in silico methods to increase quality of ancient DNA authentication in next generation sequencing reads
    Kimsis, J.
    Poksane, A.
    Petersone-Gordina, E.
    Gerhards, G.
    Ranka, R.
    FEBS OPEN BIO, 2022, 12 : 285 - 285