Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34221724›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2021

Grab what you can-an evaluation of spatial replication to decrease heterogeneity in sediment eDNA metabarcoding.

Jon T Hestetun, Anders Lanzén, Thomas G Dahlgren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jon T HestetunNORCE Environment, Bergen, Vestland, Norway.
Anders LanzénMarine Ecosystems Functioning, AZTI, Pasaia, Basque Country, Spain.
Thomas G DahlgrenNORCE Environment, Bergen, Vestland, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Environmental DNA methods such as metabarcoding have been suggested as possible alternatives or complements to the current practice of morphology-based diversity assessment for characterizing benthic communities in marine sediment. However, the source volume used in sediment eDNA studies is several magnitudes lower than that used in morphological identification. Here, we used data from a North Sea benthic sampling station to investigate to what extent metabarcoding data is affected by sampling bias and spatial heterogeneity. Using three grab parallels, we sampled five separate sediment samples from each grab. We then made five DNA extraction replicates from each sediment sample. Each extract was amplified targeting both the 18S SSU rRNA V1-V2 region for total eukaryotic composition, and the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene for metazoans only. In both datasets, extract replicates from the same sediment sample were significantly more similar than different samples from the same grab. Further, samples from different grabs were less similar than those from the same grab for 18S. Interestingly, this was not true for COI metabarcoding, where the differences within the same grab were similar to the differences between grabs. We also investigated how much of the total identified richness could be covered by extract replicates, individual sediment samples and all sediment samples from a single grab, as well as the variability of Shannon diversity and, for COI, macrofaunal biotic indices indicating environmental status. These results were largely consistent with the beta diversity findings, and show that total eukaryotic diversity can be well represented using 18S metabarcoding with a manageable number of biological replicates. Based on these results, we strongly recommend the combination of different parts of the surface of single grabs for eDNA extraction as well as several grab replicates, or alternatively box cores or similar. This will dilute the effects of dominating species and increase the coverage of alpha diversity. COI-based metabarcoding consistency was found to be lower compared to 18S, but COI macrofauna-based indices were more consistent than direct COI alpha diversity measures.

Indexed as

BenthosCommunity EcologyDNA ExtractionEnvironmental DNAEnvironmental impactMarine biologyMetabarcoding

Identifiers

PMID34221724
PMCPMC8223902

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.