Literature DB >> 29940083

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

Vanessa A Mata1,2, Hugo Rebelo1,3,4, Francisco Amorim1,2, Gary F McCracken5, Simon Jarman1,6,7, Pedro Beja1,3.   

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.
© 2018 The Authors. Molecular Ecology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bat ecology; metabarcoding; molecular diet analyses; replication; sampling design; trophic ecology

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29940083     DOI: 10.1111/mec.14779

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Ecol        ISSN: 0962-1083            Impact factor:   6.185


  17 in total

1.  Dietary characterization of the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse and sympatric rodents using DNA metabarcoding.

Authors:  Cody M Aylward; Mark J Statham; Laureen Barthman-Thompson; Douglas A Kelt; Benjamin N Sacks
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-07-17       Impact factor: 3.167

2.  Combining DNA metabarcoding and ecological networks to inform conservation biocontrol by small vertebrate predators.

Authors:  Vanessa A Mata; Luis P da Silva; Joana Veríssimo; Pedro Horta; Helena Raposeira; Gary F McCracken; Hugo Rebelo; Pedro Beja
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2021-10-14       Impact factor: 6.105

3.  In silico and empirical evaluation of twelve metabarcoding primer sets for insectivorous diet analyses.

Authors:  Orianne Tournayre; Maxime Leuchtmann; Ondine Filippi-Codaccioni; Marine Trillat; Sylvain Piry; Dominique Pontier; Nathalie Charbonnel; Maxime Galan
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 2.912

4.  Combining stable isotopes, morphological, and molecular analyses to reconstruct the diet of free-ranging consumers.

Authors:  Michaël Bonin; Christian Dussault; Joëlle Taillon; Nicolas Lecomte; Steeve D Côté
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 2.912

5.  The menu varies with metabarcoding practices: A case study with the bat Plecotus auritus.

Authors:  Tommy Andriollo; François Gillet; Johan R Michaux; Manuel Ruedi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Prospects and challenges of implementing DNA metabarcoding for high-throughput insect surveillance.

Authors:  Alexander M Piper; Jana Batovska; Noel O I Cogan; John Weiss; John Paul Cunningham; Brendan C Rodoni; Mark J Blacket
Journal:  Gigascience       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 6.524

7.  Evaluating next-generation sequencing (NGS) methods for routine monitoring of wild bees: Metabarcoding, mitogenomics or NGS barcoding.

Authors:  Morgan Gueuning; Dominik Ganser; Simon Blaser; Matthias Albrecht; Eva Knop; Christophe Praz; Juerg E Frey
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 7.090

8.  Have the cake and eat it: Optimizing nondestructive DNA metabarcoding of macroinvertebrate samples for freshwater biomonitoring.

Authors:  Filipa M S Martins; Mafalda Galhardo; Ana F Filipe; Amílcar Teixeira; Paulo Pinheiro; Joana Paupério; Paulo C Alves; Pedro Beja
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 7.090

9.  Advancing the integration of multi-marker metabarcoding data in dietary analysis of trophic generalists.

Authors:  Luís P da Silva; Vanessa A Mata; Pedro B Lopes; Paulo Pereira; Simon N Jarman; Ricardo J Lopes; Pedro Beja
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 7.090

10.  Bats partition activity in space and time in a large, heterogeneous landscape.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Beilke; Rachel V Blakey; Joy M O'Keefe
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 2.912

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.