| Literature DB >> 35271584 |
Taichi Fujii1, Kaoru Ueno1, Tomoyasu Shirako2, Masatoshi Nakamura2, Motoyasu Minami1.
Abstract
DNA metabarcoding was employed to identify plant-derived food resources for the Japanese rock ptarmigan (Lagopus muta japonica), which is registered as a natural living monument in Japan, in the Northern Japanese Alps in Toyama Prefecture, Japan, in July to October, 2015-2018. DNA metabarcoding using high-throughput sequencing (HTS) of rbcL and ITS2 sequences from alpine plants found in ptarmigan fecal samples collected in the study area. The obtained sequences were analyzed using a combination of a constructed local database and the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) database, revealed that a total of 53 plant taxa were food plant resources for ptarmigans. Of these plant taxa, 49 could be assigned to species (92.5%), three to genus (5.7%), and one to family (1.9%). Of the 23 plant families identified from the 105 fecal samples collected, the dominant families throughout all collection periods were Ericaceae (99.0% of 105 fecal samples), followed by Rosaceae (42.9%), Apiaceae (35.2%), and Poaceae (21.0%). In all of the fecal samples examined, the most frequently encountered plant species were Vaccinium ovalifolium var. ovalifolium (69.5%), followed by Empetrum nigrum var. japonicum (68.6%), Kalmia procumbens (42.9%), Tilingia ajanensis (34.3%) and V. uliginosum var. japonicum (34.3%). A rarefaction analysis for each collection period in the study revealed that the food plant resources found in the study area ranged from a minimum of 87.0% in July to a maximum of 97.5% in September, and that 96.4% of the food plant taxa were found throughout the study period. The findings showed that DNA metabarcoding using HTS to construct a local database of rbcL and ITS2 sequences in conjunction with rbcL and ITS2 sequences deposited at the NCBI, as well as rarefaction analysis, are well suited to identifying the dominant food plants in the diet of Japanese rock ptarmigans. In the windswept alpine dwarf shrub community found in the study area, dominant taxa in the Ericaceae family were the major food plant s for Japanese rock ptarmigans from July to October. This plant community therefore needs to be conserved in order to protect the food resources of Japanese rock ptarmigans in the region.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35271584 PMCID: PMC8912148 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252632
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Location of the study area on Mt. Taro in Chubu-Sangaku National Park, at the western edge of the Northern Alps, Toyama Prefecture, Japan.
The maps are reproduced from digital maps published by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (https://nlftp.mlit.go.jp/ksj/gml/datalist/KsjTmplt-N03-v3_0.html) (left) and a digital elevation model (DEM; 10 m mesh) published by the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (https://fgd.gsi.go.jp/download/menu.php) (right).
List of dates when fecal samples were collected, number of fecal samples used in the experiment, and number of fecal samples that were successfully DNA metabarcoded.
| Feces collection period | Number of collected fecal samples | Number of fecal samples from which |
|---|---|---|
| July 8–10, 2016 | 32 | 31 |
| July 26–28, 2016 | 18 | 18 |
| August 18–20, 2015 | 33 | 31 |
| September 13–14, 2018 | 20 | 17 |
| October 11–12, 2016 | 13 | 8 |
| Total | 116 | 105 |
Local databases constructed from alpine plants in the study area.
| Family name | Scientific name | Local database | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| ITS2 | ||
| Apiaceae |
| LC376994 | LC554299 |
|
| LC376976 | LC554281 | |
| Aquifoliaceae | LC377022 | LC554325 | |
| Asparagaceae | LC377033 | KY908558 | |
| Asteraceae | LC376983 | LC554288 | |
| LC377026 | LC554329 | ||
|
| LC377038 | LC554338 | |
|
| LC377005 a | LC554310 | |
|
| LC377028 a | LC554331 | |
| LC377017 | LC554320 | ||
| LC376986 a | LC554291 | ||
| Betulaceae |
| LC377009 | LC554314 |
| Brassicaceae |
| LC377000 | LC554305 |
| Celastraceae |
| LC377029 | LC554332 |
| Cornaceae | LC377034 | MG218733 | |
| Cupressaceae | LC376993 | LC554298 | |
| Cyperaceae |
| LC377013 | LC554317 |
| LC377014 | LC554318 | ||
| LC377030 | LC554333 | ||
| LC377012 | LC554316 | ||
| LC377016 | JX566737 | ||
| Diapensiaceae | LC377002 | LC554307 | |
| Droseraceae |
| LC377035 | LC554336 |
| Ericaceae |
| LC377023 | LC554326 |
|
| LC376978 | LC554283 | |
|
| LC377027 | LC554330 | |
| LC377004 | LC554309 | ||
| LC377019 | LC554322 | ||
|
| LC377041 | LC554341 d | |
| LC377032 | LC554335 d | ||
|
| LC376974 | LC554279 | |
|
| LC377042 | LC554275 e | |
| LC376973 | LC554278 e | ||
|
| LC377021 b | LC554324 | |
| LC377015 b | LC554319 | ||
| LC377020 | LC554323 f | ||
| LC377040 c | LC554340 f | ||
| LC376970 c | LC554276 f | ||
| LC376988 c | LC554293 f | ||
| KF163412 | GU361898 | ||
| Gentianaceae |
| LC376998 | LC554303 |
| LC376979 | LC554284 | ||
| LC376971 | LC554277 | ||
| Hypericaceae | LC376985 | LC554290 | |
| Juncaceae |
| LC376984 | LC554289 |
| Lentibulariaceae | LC376987 | LC554292 | |
| Melanthiaceae | LC377011 | No data | |
| LC376981 | LC554286 | ||
| Menyanthaceae | LC376991 | LC554296 | |
| Nartheciaceae |
| LC376999 | LC554304 |
|
| LC377024 | LC554327 | |
| Orchidaceae |
| LC376997 | LC554302 |
| LC377025 | LC554328 | ||
| Orobanchaceae | LC376995 | LC554300 | |
| LC376977 | LC554282 | ||
| Pinaceae |
| LC377010 | LC554315 |
|
| LC376992 | LC554297 | |
| Plantaginaceae |
| LC377031 | LC554334 |
| Poaceae |
| LC376990 | LC554295 |
|
| LC377039 | LC554339 | |
| LC376972 | No data | ||
| Polygonaceae | LC377006 | LC554311 | |
| LC377008 | LC554313 | ||
| Polytrichaceae | LC377037 | MF180404 | |
| Ranunculaceae | LC376982 | LC554287 | |
|
| LC376975 | LC554280 | |
| LC376996 | LC554301 | ||
| Rosaceae | LC377018 | LC554321 | |
|
| LC377001 | LC554306 | |
|
| LC377003 | LC554308 | |
|
| LC376989 | LC554294 | |
| Sapindaceae |
| LC377007 | LC554312 |
| Tofieldiaceae |
| LC377036 | LC554337 |
| Xanthorrhoeaceae | LC376980 | LC554285 | |
1) Accession numbers with the letters LC were deposited at DDBJ by the authors. Other accession numbers are quoted from NCBI. The same superscripted letters (a to f) indicate the same sequence.
2) Since ITS2 was not amplified in this study, DNA sequences of ITS2 registered in NCBI are given.
3) Vaccinium vitis-idaea was not collected in this study; DNA sequences for rbcL and ITS2 that have been deposited in the NCBI database are given.
4) The ITS2 product could not be amplified in this study and the ITS2 sequences are not registered in the NCBI database.
Fig 2Flowchart of process used to identify food plant resources of Japanese rock ptarmigan in this study.
Number of identified plant taxa and accuracy of identification based on rbcL and ITS2 sequences in different databases.
| DNA barcode regions | Level of identification | Local database | NCBI database | Local and NCBI databases |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Species | 34 (94.4%) | 26 (76.5%) | 36 (90.0%) |
| Genus | 1 (2.8%) | 4 (11.8%) | 3 (7.5%) | |
| Family | 1 (2.8%) | 3 (8.8%) | 1 (2.5%) | |
| Not identified to family | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (2.9%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Total identified taxa | 36 | 34 | 40 | |
| ITS2 | Species | 26 (89.7%) | 31 (100.0%) | 30 (90.9%) |
| Genus | 3 (10.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (9.1%) | |
| Family | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Not identified to family | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Total identified taxa | 29 | 31 | 33 | |
| Species | 45 (90.0%) | 40 (90.9%) | 49 (92.5%) | |
| Genus | 3 (6.0%) | 3 (6.8%) | 3 (5.7%) | |
| Family | 2 (4.0%) | 1 (2.3%) | 1 (1.9%) | |
| Not identified to family | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Total identified taxa | 50 | 44 | 53 |
For detailed results of homology searches obtained for each database, see S5 to S7 Tables.
Food plant taxa identified using DNA metabarcoding with rbcL and ITS2.
| Family name | Scientific name | Database | Published previously in the literature | No. of fecal samples | Detection frequency per 105 fecal samples | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| July 8–10, | July 26–28, 2016 (n = 18) | August 18–20, 2015 (n = 31) | September 13–14, 2018 (n = 17) | October 11–12, 2016 (n = 8) | Total | |||||
| Apiaceae |
| Yes | 10 | - | - | - | - | 10 | 9.5% | |
|
| Yes | 16 | 4 | 12 | 4 | - | 36 | 34.3% | ||
| Aquifoliaceae | ||||||||||
| Asparagaceae |
| Yes | ||||||||
| Asteraceae | Asteraceae ( |
| No | - | - | - | - | 2 | 2 | 1.9% |
| Yes | ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| No | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 7.6% | |||
| ITS2 | No | - | - | 1 | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | ||
|
| ITS2 | No | 1 | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | |
| Betulaceae | ITS2 | No | 1 | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | |
|
| Yes | 4 | - | 2 | 4 | 2 | 12 | 11.4% | ||
| Brassicaceae |
| |||||||||
| Celastraceae |
| |||||||||
| Cephaloziaceae |
| ITS2 | No | 1 | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% |
| Cornaceae |
|
| No | - | - | 4 | - | 2 | 6 | 5.7% |
| Cupressaceae | No | 1 | 1 | - | - | - | 2 | 1.9% | ||
| Cyperaceae |
| ITS2 | No | 3 | 5 | 1 | - | - | 9 | 8.6% |
| ITS2 | No | - | - | 1 | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | ||
| ITS2 | No | - | 1 | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | ||
|
| ||||||||||
| Diapensiaceae |
| Yes | 1 | - | 1 | - | - | 2 | 1.9% | |
| Droseraceae |
| |||||||||
| Ericaceae |
| No | - | 3 | - | - | - | 3 | 2.9% | |
|
| Yes | |||||||||
|
| Yes | 1 | - | 1 | - | - | 2 | 1.9% | ||
| Yes | 15 | 8 | 28 | 14 | 7 | 72 | 68.6% | |||
|
|
| No | - | 1 | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | |
|
|
| No | - | - | - | 3 | 1 | 4 | 3.8% | |
|
| Yes | - | - | 3 | - | 1 | 4 | 3.8% | ||
|
| Yes | 5 | 16 | 11 | 7 | 6 | 45 | 42.9% | ||
| ITS2 | Yes | 1 | - | 1 | - | - | 2 | 1.9% | ||
|
| Yes | 4 | - | 4 | 2 | 4 | 14 | 13.3% | ||
|
| Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | - | - | 4 | 2.9% | ||
|
| ||||||||||
| Yes | 3 | 5 | 11 | 5 | - | 24 | 22.9% | |||
|
| ITS2 | No | - | - | 1 | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | |
|
| Yes | 28 | 10 | 19 | 8 | 8 | 73 | 69.5% | ||
| Yes | ||||||||||
| Yes | ||||||||||
| Yes | 14 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 36 | 34.3% | |||
| Yes | 2 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 13.3% | |||
| Fabaceae |
| ITS2 | No | 1 | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% |
| Gentianaceae |
| |||||||||
|
| No | - | - | 1 | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | ||
| No | - | - | 1 | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | |||
| Hypericaceae | ||||||||||
| Juncaceae |
| No | - | 1 | 7 | - | - | 8 | 7.6% | |
| Lentibulariaceae | ||||||||||
| Melanthiaceae |
| |||||||||
| Menyanthaceae | No | 3 | 7 | 1 | 1 | - | 12 | 11.4% | ||
| Nartheciaceae |
|
| No | 1 | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% |
|
|
| No | - | - | 1 | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | |
| Orchidaceae |
|
| No | - | 1 | 3 | - | - | 4 | 3.8% |
| Orobanchaceae | ||||||||||
|
| No | 2 | 1 | - | - | - | 3 | 2.9% | ||
| Pinaceae |
| |||||||||
|
| Yes | 1 | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | ||
| Plantaginaceae |
| |||||||||
| Poaceae |
| No | - | - | 8 | - | 1 | 9 | 8.6% | |
|
|
| No | - | - | 1 | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | |
|
| ||||||||||
|
|
| No | 1 | 1 | 13 | - | - | 15 | 14.3% | |
| Polygonaceae | No | 1 | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | ||
| Polytrichaceae |
| ITS2 | No | 5 | 3 | 4 | - | - | 12 | 11.4% |
| Ranunculaceae |
| ITS2 | No | - | - | 1 | - | - | 1 | 1.0% |
| ITS2 | Yes | 1 | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1.0% | ||
|
|
| No | - | - | 2 | - | - | 2 | 1.9% | |
| Yes | ||||||||||
| Rosaceae | ||||||||||
|
| Yes | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | - | 6 | 5.7% | ||
|
|
| No | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1 | 1.0% | |
|
| Yes | 17 | 1 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 31 | 29.5% | ||
|
| No | - | - | 13 | 2 | 1 | 16 | 15.2% | ||
| Sapindaceae |
| |||||||||
| Tofieldiaceae |
| No | - | 5 | 1 | - | - | 6 | 5.7% | |
| Xanthorrhoeaceae | ||||||||||
| Total number of food plant taxa | 151 | 84 | 181 | 64 | 46 | 526 | ||||
1) Refer to Kobayashi et al., [16], Chiba et al., [17], and Satomi et al., [18].
Fig 3Intra-annual changes in major food plant taxa.
The dominant plant species in each of the five fecal sampling periods are shown. N indicates the total number of food plant taxa for each fecal sampling period.
Estimated asymptotic Shannon diversity and coverage of food plant candidates for each fecal sampling period.
| Feces collection period | No. of fecal samples | No. of identified plant taxa | Sobs | Sest | Coverage of food plant candidates (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| July 8–10, 2016 | 31 | 31 | 16.6 | 20.1 | 90.9 |
| July 26–28, 2016 | 18 | 23 | 15.2 | 21.1 | 87.0 |
| August 18–20, 2015 | 31 | 36 | 20.6 | 25.7 | 90.7 |
| September 13–14, 2018 | 17 | 15 | 11.6 | 12.9 | 97.5 |
| October 11–12, 2016 | 8 | 16 | 12.1 | 14.4 | 89.5 |
| Total | 105 | 53 | 23.1 | 25.0 | 96.4 |
Sobs: Observed Shannon diversity.
Sest: Estimated asymptotic Shannon diversity.