Literature DB >> 35861927

Can nuclear aquatic environmental DNA be a genetic marker for the accurate estimation of species abundance?

Toshiaki S Jo1,2,3, Kenji Tsuri4, Hiroki Yamanaka5,6.   

Abstract

Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis is a promising tool for the sensitive and effective monitoring of species distribution and abundance. Traditional eDNA analysis has targeted mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) fragments due to their abundance in cells; however, the quantification may vary depending on cell type and physiology. Conversely, some recent eDNA studies have targeted multi-copy nuclear DNA (nuDNA) fragments, such as ribosomal RNA genes, in water, and reported a higher detectability and more rapid degradation than mitochondrial eDNA (mt-eDNA). These properties suggest that nuclear eDNA (nu-eDNA) may be useful for the accurate estimation of species abundance relative to mt-eDNA, but which remains unclear. In this study, we compiled previous studies and re-analyzed the relationships between mt- and nu-eDNA concentration and species abundance by comparing the R2 values of the linear regression. We then performed an aquarium experiment using zebrafish (Danio rerio) to compare the relationships across genetic regions, including single-copy nuDNA. We found more accurate relationships between multi-copy nu-eDNA and species abundance than mt-eDNA in these datasets, although the difference was not significant upon weighted-averaging the R2 values. Moreover, we compared the decay rate constants of zebrafish eDNA across genetic regions and found that multi-copy nu-eDNA degraded faster than mt-eDNA under pH 7, implying a quick turnover of multi-copy nu-eDNA in the field. Although further empirical studies of nu-eDNA applications are necessary to support our findings, this study provides the groundwork for improving the estimation accuracy of species abundance via eDNA analysis.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abundance estimation; Degradation; Environmental DNA (eDNA); Nuclear DNA; Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR); R 2

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35861927     DOI: 10.1007/s00114-022-01808-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Naturwissenschaften        ISSN: 0028-1042


  40 in total

1.  Does Size Matter? An Experimental Evaluation of the Relative Abundance and Decay Rates of Aquatic Environmental DNA.

Authors:  Jonas Bylemans; Elise M Furlan; Dianne M Gleeson; Christopher M Hardy; Richard P Duncan
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial.

Authors:  Sara Balduzzi; Gerta Rücker; Guido Schwarzer
Journal:  Evid Based Ment Health       Date:  2019-09-28

3.  Optimizing techniques to capture and extract environmental DNA for detection and quantification of fish.

Authors:  Jessica J Eichmiller; Loren M Miller; Peter W Sorensen
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 7.090

4.  Species detection using environmental DNA from water samples.

Authors:  Gentile Francesco Ficetola; Claude Miaud; François Pompanon; Pierre Taberlet
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2008-08-23       Impact factor: 3.703

Review 5.  Mitochondria: a historical review.

Authors:  L Ernster; G Schatz
Journal:  J Cell Biol       Date:  1981-12       Impact factor: 10.539

6.  Use of droplet digital PCR for estimation of fish abundance and biomass in environmental DNA surveys.

Authors:  Hideyuki Doi; Kimiko Uchii; Teruhiko Takahara; Saeko Matsuhashi; Hiroki Yamanaka; Toshifumi Minamoto
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-23       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  An improved environmental DNA assay for bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) based on the ribosomal internal transcribed spacer I.

Authors:  Joseph C Dysthe; Thomas W Franklin; Kevin S McKelvey; Michael K Young; Michael K Schwartz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Meta-analysis shows that environmental DNA outperforms traditional surveys, but warrants better reporting standards.

Authors:  Julija Fediajevaite; Victoria Priestley; Richard Arnold; Vincent Savolainen
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 2.912

9.  Copy number polymorphism in Fcgr3 predisposes to glomerulonephritis in rats and humans.

Authors:  Timothy J Aitman; Rong Dong; Timothy J Vyse; Penny J Norsworthy; Michelle D Johnson; Jennifer Smith; Jonathan Mangion; Cheri Roberton-Lowe; Amy J Marshall; Enrico Petretto; Matthew D Hodges; Gurjeet Bhangal; Sheetal G Patel; Kelly Sheehan-Rooney; Mark Duda; Paul R Cook; David J Evans; Jan Domin; Jonathan Flint; Joseph J Boyle; Charles D Pusey; H Terence Cook
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2006-02-16       Impact factor: 49.962

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.