Large-scale biomonitoring of remote and threatened ecosystems via high-throughput sequencing

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 10, 2015, Pages

  Gibson, Joel F ^a,b   Shokralla, Shadi ^a   Curry, Colin ^c   Baird, Donald J ^c   Monk, Wendy A ^c   King, Ian ^a   Hajibabaei, Mehrdad ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

^b ENVIRONMENT CANADA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; BIOLOGICAL MONITORING; CALCULATION; CANADA; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DNA SEQUENCE; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; ANIMAL; CLASSIFICATION; DNA BARCODING; GENETICS; INVERTEBRATE; PROCEDURES; REMOTE SENSING;

FRESH WATER;

ANIMALS; BIODIVERSITY; DNA BARCODING, TAXONOMIC; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; FRESH WATER; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; INVERTEBRATES; REMOTE SENSING TECHNOLOGY; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA;

EID: 84949771411     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138432     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Florencio M, Díaz-Paniagua C, Gómez-Rodríguez C, Serrano L. Biodiversity patterns in a macroinvertebrate community of a temporary pond network. Insect Conserv. Diver. 2013; 7: 4-21. doi: 10.1111/icad.12029
2. Astorga A, Death R, Death F, Paavola R, Chakraborty M, Muotka T. Habitat heterogeneity drives the geographical distribution of beta diversity: the case of New Zealand stream invertebrates. Ecol. Evol. 2014; 4: 2693-2702. doi: 10.1002/ece3.1124 PMID: 25077020
3. Narangarvuu D, Hsu C-B, Shieh S-H, Wu F-C, Yang P-S. Macroinvertebrate assemblage patterns as indicators of water quality in the Xindian watershed, Taiwan. J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2014; 17: 505-513. doi: 10.1016/j.aspen.2014.04.011
4. Pasari JR, Levi T, Zavaleta ES, Tilman D. Several scales of biodiversity affect ecosystem multifunctionality. P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2013; 110: 10219-10222. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1314920110
5. Anas MUM, Scott KA, Cooper RN, Wissel B. Zooplankton communities are good indicators of potential impacts of Athabasca oil sands operations on downwind boreal lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2014; 71: 719-732. doi: 10.1139/cjfas-2013-0472
6. Buss DF, Carlisle DM, Chon T- S, Culp J, Harding JS, Keizer-Vlek HE, et al. Stream biomonitoring using macroinvertebrates around the globe: a comparison of large-scale programs. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2015; 187: 4132. doi: 10.1007/s10661-014-4132-8 PMID: 25487459
7. Environment Canada. Canadian Aquatic Biomonitoring Network Laboratory Methods: processing, taxonomy, and quality control of benthic macroinvertebrate Samples. Ottawa: Environment Canada; 2012.
8. Hajibabaei M, Singer GAC, Hebert PDN, Hickey DA. DNA barcoding: how it complements taxonomy, molecular phylogenetics and population genetics. Trends Genet. 2007; 23: 167-172. PMID: 17316886
9. Ratnasingham S, Hebert PDN. BOLD: the barcode of life data system (www.barcodinglife.org). Mol. Ecol. Notes. 2007; 7: 355-364. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01678.x PMID: 18784790
10. Benson DA, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Lipman DJ, Ostell J, Sayers EW. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010; 39: D32-D37. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkq1079 PMID: 21071399
11. Sweeney BW, Battle JM, Jackson JK, Dapkey T. Can DNA barcodes of stream macroinvertebrates improve descriptions of community structure and water quality? J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 2011; 30: 195-216. doi: 10.1899/10-016.1
12. Pilgrim EM, Jackson SA, Swenson S, Turcsanyi I, Friedman E, Weigt L, et al. Incorporation of DNA barcoding into a large-scale biomonitoring program: opportunities and pitfalls. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 2011; 30: 217-231. doi: 10.1899/10-012.1
13. Gill BA, Harrington RA, Kondratieff BC, Zamudio KR, Poff NL, Funk WC. Morphological taxonomy, DNA barcoding, and species diversity in southern Rocky Mountain headwater streams. Freshw. Sci. 2014; 33: 288-301. doi: 10.1086/674526
14. Jackson JK, Battle JM, White BP, Pilgrim EM, Stein ED, Miller PE, et al. Cryptic biodiversity in streams: a comparison of macroinvertebrate communities based on morphological and DNA barcode identifications. Freshw. Sci. 2014; 33: 312-324. doi: 10.1086/675225
15. Stein ED, White BP, Mazor RD, Jackson JK, Battle JM, Miller PE, et al. Does DNA barcoding improve performance of traditional stream bioassessment metrics? Freshw. Sci. 2014; 33: 302-311. doi: 10.1086/674782
16. Hajibabaei M, Spall JL, Shokralla S, van Konynenburg S. Assessing biodiversity of a freshwater benthic macroinvertebrate community through nondestructive environmental barcoding of DNA from preservative ethanol. BMC Ecol. 2012; 12: 28. doi: 10.1186/1472-6785-12-28 PMID: 23259585
17. Yu DW, Ji Y, Emerson BC, Wang X, Ye C, Yang C, et al. Biodiversity soup: metabarcoding of arthropods for rapid biodiversity assessment and biomonitoring. Meth. Ecol. Evol. 2012; 3: 613-623. doi: 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2012.00198.x
18. Ji Y, Ashton L, Pedley SM, Edwards DP, Tang Y, Nakamura A, et al. Reliable, verifiable and efficient monitoring of biodiversity via metabarcoding. Ecol. Lett. 2013; 16: 1245-1257. doi: 10.1111/ele.12162 PMID: 23910579
19. Hajibabaei M, Shokralla S, Zhou X, Singer GAC, Baird DJ. Environmental barcoding: a next-generation sequencing approach for biomonitoring applications using river benthos. PLoS One. 2011; 6: e17497. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017497 PMID: 21533287
20. Gibson J, Shokralla S, Porter TM, King I, van Konynenburg S, Janzen DH, et al. Simultaneous assessment of the macrobiome and microbiome in a bulk sample of tropical arthropods through DNA metasystematics. P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2014; 111: 8007-8012. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1406468111
21. Marchant R. A subsampler for samples of benthic invertebrates. Bull. Australian Soc. Limnol. 1989; 12: 49-52.
22. Folmer O, Black M, Hoeh W, Lutz R, Vrijenhoek R. DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol. Marine Biol. Biotech. 1994; 3: 294-299.
23. Schmieder R, Edwards R. Quality control and preprocessing of metagenomic datasets. Bioinformatics. 2011; 27: 863-864. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr026 PMID: 21278185
24. Edgar RC. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics. 2010; 26: 2460-2461. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq461 PMID: 20709691
25. Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics. 2011; 27: 2194-2200. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr381 PMID: 21700674
26. Zhang Z, Schwartz S, Wagner L, Miller W. A greedy algorithm for aligning DNA sequences. J. Comput. Biol. 2000; 7: 203-214. PMID: 10890397
27. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O'Hara RB, et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. 2.2-1 ed; 2015. Available: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan.
28. R Core Team. R: A language environment for statistical computing. 3.1.2 ed. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2014.
29. Anderson MJ. Distance-based tests for homogeneity of multivariate dispersions. Biometrics. 2006; 62: 245-253. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00440.x PMID: 16542252
30. Anderson MJ, Ellingsen KE, McArdle BH. Multivariate dispersion as a measure of beta diversity. Ecol. Lett. 2006; 9: 683-693. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00926.x PMID: 16706913
31. Orlofske JM, Baird DJ. The tiny mayfly in the room: implications of size-dependent invertebrate taxonomic identification for biomonitoring data properties. Aquat. Ecol. 2013; 47: 481-494. doi: 10.1007/ s10452-013-9460-1
32. Engelbrektson A, Kunin V, Wrighton KC, Zvenigorodsky N, Chen F, Ochman H, et al. Experimental factors affecting PCR-based estimates of microbial species richness and evenness. ISME J. 2010; 4: 642-647. doi: 10.1038/ismej.2009.153 PMID: 20090784
33. Gonzalez JM, Portillo MC, Belda-Ferre P, Mira A. Amplification by PCR artificially reduces the proportion of the rare biosphere in microbial communities. PLoS One. 2012; 7: e29973. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0029973 PMID: 22253843
34. Leray M, Knowlton N. DNA barcoding and metabarcoding of standardized samples reveal patterns of marine benthic diversity. P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2015; 112: 2076-2081. doi: 10.5883/ds-arms
35. Arce E, Archaimbault V, Mondy CP, Usseglio-Polatera P. Recovery dynamics in invertebrate communities following water-quality improvement: taxonomy- vs trait-based assessment. Freshw. Sci. 2014; 33: 1060-1073. doi: 10.1086/678673
36. Semprucci F, Frontalini F, Sbrocca C, du Châtelet EA, Bout-Roumazeilles V, Coccioni R, et al. Meiobenthos and free-living nematodes as tools for biomonitoring environments affected by riverine impact. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2015; 187: 251. doi: 10.1007/s10661-015-4493-7 PMID: 25877645
37. Monaghan KA, Soares AMVM. Improving the accuracy of aquatic macroinvertebrate trait assignment - the importance of taxon-weighting. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2013; 70: 885-894. doi: 10.1139/cjfas-2012-0402
38. Chang FH, Lawrence JE, Rios-Touma B, Resh VH. Tolerance values of benthic macroinvertebrates for stream biomonitoring: assessment of assumptions underlying scoring systems worldwide. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2014; 186: 2135-2149. doi: 10.1007/s10661-013-3523-6 PMID: 24214297
39. Gray C, Baird DJ, Baumgartner S, Jacob U, Jenkins GB, O'Gorman EJ, et al. Ecological networks: the missing links in biomonitoring science. J. Appl. Ecol. 2014; 51: 1444-1449. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12300 PMID: 25558087
40. Orlofske JM, Baird DJ. A geometric morphometric approach to establish body-shape trait criteria for aquatic insects. Freshw. Sci. 2014; 33: 978-994. doi: 10.1086/676912
41. Huang Q, Gao J, Cai Y, Yin H, Gao Y, Zhao J, et al. Development and application of benthic macroinvertebrate-based multimetric indices for the assessment of streams and rivers in the Taihu Basin, China. Ecol. Indic. 2015; 48: 649-659. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.014
42. Schmidt-Kloiber A, Hering D. www.freshwaterecology.info -An online tool that unifies, standardises and codifies more than 20,000 European freshwater organisms and their ecological preferences. Ecol. Indic. 2015; 53: 271-282. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.02.007
43. Heino J, Paavola R, Virtanen R, Muotka T. Searching for biodiversity indicators in running waters: do bryophytes, macroinvertebrates, and fish show congruent diversity patterns? Biodivers. Conserv. 2005; 14: 415-428.
44. Lindenmayer DB, Likens GE. Direct measurement versus surrogate indicator species for evaluating environmental change and biodiversity loss. Ecosystems. 2010; 14: 47-59. doi: 10.1007/s10021-010-9394-6
45. Curry CJ, Zhou X, Baird DJ. Congruence of biodiversity measures among larval dragonflies and caddisflies from three Canadian rivers. Freshwater Biol. 2012; 57: 628-639. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2011.02724.x
46. Tonkin JD, Shah DN, Kuemmerlen M, Li F, Cai Q, Haase P, et al. Climatic and catchment-scale predictors of Chinese stream insect richness differ between taxonomic groups. PLoS One. 2015; 10: e0123250. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone PMID: 25909190
47. Karr JR. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries. 1981; 6: 21-27.