Literature DB >> 34002951

Benchmarking bioinformatic tools for fast and accurate eDNA metabarcoding species identification.

Laetitia Mathon1,2, Alice Valentini2, Pierre-Edouard Guérin1, Eric Normandeau3, Cyril Noel4, Clément Lionnet5, Emilie Boulanger1,6, Wilfried Thuillier5, Louis Bernatchez3, David Mouillot6,7, Tony Dejean2, Stéphanie Manel1.   

Abstract

Bioinformatic analysis of eDNA metabarcoding data is crucial toward rigorously assessing biodiversity. Many programs are now available for each step of the required analyses, but their relative abilities at providing fast and accurate species lists have seldom been evaluated. We used simulated mock communities and real fish eDNA metabarcoding data to evaluate the performance of 13 bioinformatic programs and pipelines to retrieve fish occurrence and read abundance using the 12S mt rRNA gene marker. We used four indices to compare the outputs of each program with the simulated samples: sensitivity, F-measure, root-mean-square error (RMSE) on read relative abundances, and execution time. We found marked differences among programs only for the taxonomic assignment step, both in terms of sensitivity, F-measure and RMSE. Running time was highly different between programs for each step. The fastest programs with best indices for each step were assembled into a pipeline. We compare this pipeline to pipelines constructed from existing toolboxes (OBITools, Barque, and QIIME 2). Our pipeline and Barque obtained the best performance for all indices and appear to be better alternatives to highly used pipelines for analyzing fish eDNA metabarcoding data with a complete reference database. Real eDNA metabarcoding data also indicated differences for taxonomic assignment and execution time only. This study reveals major differences between programs during the taxonomic assignment step. The choice of algorithm for the taxonomic assignment can have a significant impact on diversity estimates and should be made according to the objectives of the study. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  benchmark; bioinformatics; eDNA; metabarcoding; sensitivity; species identification

Year:  2021        PMID: 34002951     DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.13430

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour        ISSN: 1755-098X            Impact factor:   7.090


  4 in total

1.  Developing Indicators of Nutrient Pollution in Streams Using 16S rRNA Gene Metabarcoding of Periphyton-Associated Bacteria.

Authors:  Erik M Pilgrim; Nathan J Smucker; Huiyun Wu; John Martinson; Christopher T Nietch; Marirosa Molina; John A Darling; Brent R Johnson
Journal:  Water (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-30       Impact factor: 3.530

2.  Applying convolutional neural networks to speed up environmental DNA annotation in a highly diverse ecosystem.

Authors:  Benjamin Flück; Laëtitia Mathon; Stéphanie Manel; Alice Valentini; Tony Dejean; Camille Albouy; David Mouillot; Wilfried Thuiller; Jérôme Murienne; Sébastien Brosse; Loïc Pellissier
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-17       Impact factor: 4.996

3.  Influence of DNA extraction kits on freshwater fungal DNA metabarcoding.

Authors:  Shunsuke Matsuoka; Yoriko Sugiyama; Mariko Nagano; Hideyuki Doi
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 3.061

Review 4.  Environmental DNA analysis as an emerging non-destructive method for plant biodiversity monitoring: a review.

Authors:  Pritam Banerjee; Kathryn A Stewart; Gobinda Dey; Caterina M Antognazza; Raju Kumar Sharma; Jyoti Prakash Maity; Santanu Saha; Hideyuki Doi; Natasha de Vere; Michael W Y Chan; Pin-Yun Lin; Hung-Chun Chao; Chien-Yen Chen
Journal:  AoB Plants       Date:  2022-07-02       Impact factor: 3.138

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.