Non‐specific amplification compromises environmental DNA metabarcoding with COI

By R. Collins, Judith Bakker, Owen S. Wangensteen, Ana Z. Soto, L. Corrigan, D. W. Sims, M. Genner, Stefano Mariani. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2019

256 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Metabarcoding extra‐organismal DNA from environmental samples is now a key technique in aquatic biomonitoring and ecosystem health assessment. Of critical consideration when designing experiments, and especially so when developing community standards and legislative frameworks, is the choice of genetic marker and primer set. Mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI), the standard DNA barcode marker for animals, with its extensive reference library, taxonomic discriminatory power and predictable sequence variation, is the natural choice for many metabarcoding applications. However, for targeting specific taxonomic groups in environmental samples, the utility of COI has yet to be fully scrutinized. Here, by using a case study of marine and freshwater fishes from the British Isles, we quantify the in silico performance of twelve primer pairs from four mitochondrial loci – COI, cytochrome b, 12S and 16S – in terms of reference library coverage, taxonomic discriminatory power and primer universality. We subsequently test in vitro four primer pairs – three COI and one 12S – for their specificity, reproducibility, and congruence with independent datasets derived from traditional survey methods at five estuarine and coastal sites around the English Channel and North Sea. Our results show that for aqueous extra‐organismal DNA at low template concentrations, both metazoan‐targeted and fish‐targeted COI primers perform poorly in comparison to 12S, exhibiting low levels of reproducibility due to non‐specific amplification of prokaryotic and non‐target eukaryotic DNAs. An ideal metabarcode would have an extensive reference library upon which custom primers could be designed, either for broad assessments of biodiversity, or taxon specific surveys. Such a database is available for COI, but low primer specificity hinders practical application, while conversely, 12S primers offer high specificity, but lack adequate references. The latter, however, can be mitigated by expanding the concept of DNA barcodes to include whole mitochondrial genomes generated by genome‐skimming existing tissue collections.

Subfields: Ecology, Molecular Biology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4e2970402c79e52ba1c8d8486eb1c9d69d3f98b1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. L. Lawson Handley
2. Tony Dejean
3. M. Miya
4. Ryo O. Gotoh
5. Meng Yao
6. Shan Zhang
7. Loïc Pellissier
8. Jindong Zhao

In Molecular Biology

1. L. Lawson Handley
2. Tony Dejean
3. T. Sado
4. M. Miya
5. Ryo O. Gotoh
6. Meng Yao
7. Shan Zhang
8. Loïc Pellissier

Citations in the corpus

• Read counts from environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding reflect fish abundance and biomass in drained ponds (2020, background): “Insufficient sampling effort, inhibition, primer biases, sequencing artefacts, database inaccuracy and contamination are the main methodological sources of bias (McKee et al., 2015; Grey et al., 2018; Collins et al., 2019; Wood et al., 2019).”
• Comparing environmental DNA metabarcoding and underwater visual census to monitor tropical reef fishes (2020, background): “…widely employed in various aquatic ecosystems (Deiner et al., 2017), but some uncertainties remain as regard to sampling design (Valentini et al., 2016) and the choice of markers (Collins et al., 2019; Stat et al., 2017) and bioinformatics pipeline (Calderón-Sanou et al., 2020; Juhel et al., 2020).”
• A comprehensive and comparative evaluation of primers for metabarcoding eDNA from fish (2020, background): “Inadequate taxonomic specificity for the target group would lead to excessive amplification of non-target sequences, causing swamping of the desired taxa and wasting of sequencing throughput (Collins et al., 2019).”
• MiFish metabarcoding: a high-throughput approach for simultaneous detection of multiple fish species from environmental DNA and other samples (2020, methodology): “In this review article, we first introduced three recent independent studies on performance evaluation of eDNA metabarcoding primers including MiFish (Bylemans et al. 2018a; Collins et al. 2019; Zhang et al. 2020).”