Literature DB >> 30118180

Quantitative and qualitative assessment of pollen DNA metabarcoding using constructed species mixtures.

Karen L Bell1, Kevin S Burgess2, Jamieson C Botsch1, Emily K Dobbs1, Timothy D Read3, Berry J Brosi1.   

Abstract

Pollen DNA metabarcoding-marker-based genetic identification of potentially mixed-species pollen samples-has applications across a variety of fields. While basic species-level pollen identification using standard DNA barcode markers is established, the extent to which metabarcoding (a) correctly assigns species identities to mixes (qualitative matching) and (b) generates sequence reads proportionally to their relative abundance in a sample (quantitative matching) is unclear, as these have not been assessed relative to known standards. We tested the quantitative and qualitative robustness of metabarcoding in constructed pollen mixtures varying in species richness (1-9 species), taxonomic relatedness (within genera to across class) and rarity (5%-100% of grains), using Illumina MiSeq with the markers rbcL and ITS2. Qualitatively, species composition determinations were largely correct, but false positives and negatives occurred. False negatives were typically driven by lack of a barcode gap or rarity in a sample. Species richness and taxonomic relatedness, however, did not strongly impact correct determinations. False positives were likely driven by contamination, chimeric sequences and/or misidentification by the bioinformatics pipeline. Quantitatively, the proportion of reads for each species was only weakly correlated with its relative abundance, in contrast to suggestions from some other studies. Quantitative mismatches are not correctable by consistent scaling factors, but instead are context-dependent on the other species present in a sample. Together, our results show that metabarcoding is largely robust for determining pollen presence/absence but that sequence reads should not be used to infer relative abundance of pollen grains.
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords:  DNA extraction bias; DNA metabarcoding; amplification bias; copy number bias; pollen DNA barcoding; quantitative DNA metabarcoding

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30118180     DOI: 10.1111/mec.14840

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


  22 in total

Review 1.  Improving bee health through genomics.

Authors:  Christina M Grozinger; Amro Zayed
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 53.242

2.  Consistent and correctable bias in metagenomic sequencing experiments.

Authors:  Michael R McLaren; Amy D Willis; Benjamin J Callahan
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 3.  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

4.  Foraging strategies are maintained despite workforce reduction: A multidisciplinary survey on the pollen collected by a social pollinator.

Authors:  Paolo Biella; Nicola Tommasi; Asma Akter; Lorenzo Guzzetti; Jan Klecka; Anna Sandionigi; Massimo Labra; Andrea Galimberti
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Pollinator specialization increases with a decrease in a mass-flowering plant in networks inferred from DNA metabarcoding.

Authors:  André Pornon; Sandra Baksay; Nathalie Escaravage; Monique Burrus; Christophe Andalo
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 2.912

6.  Deep Learning Methods for Improving Pollen Monitoring.

Authors:  Elżbieta Kubera; Agnieszka Kubik-Komar; Krystyna Piotrowska-Weryszko; Magdalena Skrzypiec
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 3.576

7.  Optimization of the second internal transcribed spacer (ITS2) for characterizing land plants from soil.

Authors:  Emma K Timpano; Melissa K R Scheible; Kelly A Meiklejohn
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  A citizen science supported study on seasonal diversity and monoflorality of pollen collected by honey bees in Austria.

Authors:  Robert Brodschneider; Kristina Gratzer; Elfriede Kalcher-Sommersguter; Helmut Heigl; Waltraud Auer; Rudolf Moosbeckhofer; Karl Crailsheim
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Comparing sediment DNA extraction methods for assessing organic enrichment associated with marine aquaculture.

Authors:  John K Pearman; Nigel B Keeley; Susanna A Wood; Olivier Laroche; Anastasija Zaiko; Georgia Thomson-Laing; Laura Biessy; Javier Atalah; Xavier Pochon
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 2.984

10.  A new method of metabarcoding Microsporidia and their hosts reveals high levels of microsporidian infections in mosquitoes (Culicidae).

Authors:  Artur Trzebny; Anna Slodkowicz-Kowalska; James J Becnel; Neil Sanscrainte; Miroslawa Dabert
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 7.090

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.