How does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?

Macroinvertebrate surveys are commonly used for assessing the health of freshwater systems around the world. Traditionally, surveying involves morphologically identifying the families, and sometimes genera, present in samples. Biological indices, derived from taxonomic lists, provide convenient ways...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	M.E. Shackleton, K.A. Dafforn, N.P. Murphy, P. Greenfield, M. Cassidy, C.H. Besley
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Elsevier 2021
Materias:	Metabarcoding Macroinvertebrate DNA Biological assessment Ecology QH540-549.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/f75a8c02aa4246f8834145fe1e56a927
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:f75a8c02aa4246f8834145fe1e56a927
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:f75a8c02aa4246f8834145fe1e56a9272021-12-01T04:47:55ZHow does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?1470-160X10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107537https://doaj.org/article/f75a8c02aa4246f8834145fe1e56a9272021-06-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X21002028https://doaj.org/toc/1470-160XMacroinvertebrate surveys are commonly used for assessing the health of freshwater systems around the world. Traditionally, surveying involves morphologically identifying the families, and sometimes genera, present in samples. Biological indices, derived from taxonomic lists, provide convenient ways to summarise community data and may be fairly insensitive to species-level changes in community compositions. In recent years, molecular techniques for identifying taxa have become increasingly popular and metabarcoding approaches that offer the ability to identify species from mixtures of whole animals (bulk-samples) or from environmental samples have gained much attention. However, generating accurate species lists from metabarcode data is challenging and can be impacted by sample type, choice of primers, community composition within samples, and the availability of reference sequences. This study compares the performance of molecular data extracted from bulk-samples against morphological data in calculating two biological indices (the Stream Invertebrate Grade Number Average Level 2 (SIGNAL2), which is calculated from family-level data, and a genus-level equivalent of this index, SIGNAL_SG) and one biological metric (taxon richness). Further, molecular indices and metrics derived from global, local or mixed reference DNA libraries and with varying degrees of filtering processes applied to them, are compared with respect to the strength of their relationships with morphological indices and metrics. Molecularly derived SIGNAL2 and SIGNAL_SG scores correlated strongly with morphologically derived scores, and were strongest when using a reference library containing a mix of local and global data. Molecularly derived richness metrics were moderately correlated with morphological taxa richness; however, the strongest correlations were observed when taxa that could not be assigned SIGNAL grades were omitted from analyses. This study highlights the utility of using molecular data as an objective and sensitive alternative to traditional freshwater biological assessment using macroinvertebrates.M.E. ShackletonK.A. DaffornN.P. MurphyP. GreenfieldM. CassidyC.H. BesleyElsevierarticleMetabarcodingMacroinvertebrateDNABiological assessmentEcologyQH540-549.5ENEcological Indicators, Vol 125, Iss , Pp 107537- (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Metabarcoding Macroinvertebrate DNA Biological assessment Ecology QH540-549.5
spellingShingle	Metabarcoding Macroinvertebrate DNA Biological assessment Ecology QH540-549.5 M.E. Shackleton K.A. Dafforn N.P. Murphy P. Greenfield M. Cassidy C.H. Besley How does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?
description	Macroinvertebrate surveys are commonly used for assessing the health of freshwater systems around the world. Traditionally, surveying involves morphologically identifying the families, and sometimes genera, present in samples. Biological indices, derived from taxonomic lists, provide convenient ways to summarise community data and may be fairly insensitive to species-level changes in community compositions. In recent years, molecular techniques for identifying taxa have become increasingly popular and metabarcoding approaches that offer the ability to identify species from mixtures of whole animals (bulk-samples) or from environmental samples have gained much attention. However, generating accurate species lists from metabarcode data is challenging and can be impacted by sample type, choice of primers, community composition within samples, and the availability of reference sequences. This study compares the performance of molecular data extracted from bulk-samples against morphological data in calculating two biological indices (the Stream Invertebrate Grade Number Average Level 2 (SIGNAL2), which is calculated from family-level data, and a genus-level equivalent of this index, SIGNAL_SG) and one biological metric (taxon richness). Further, molecular indices and metrics derived from global, local or mixed reference DNA libraries and with varying degrees of filtering processes applied to them, are compared with respect to the strength of their relationships with morphological indices and metrics. Molecularly derived SIGNAL2 and SIGNAL_SG scores correlated strongly with morphologically derived scores, and were strongest when using a reference library containing a mix of local and global data. Molecularly derived richness metrics were moderately correlated with morphological taxa richness; however, the strongest correlations were observed when taxa that could not be assigned SIGNAL grades were omitted from analyses. This study highlights the utility of using molecular data as an objective and sensitive alternative to traditional freshwater biological assessment using macroinvertebrates.
format	article
author	M.E. Shackleton K.A. Dafforn N.P. Murphy P. Greenfield M. Cassidy C.H. Besley
author_facet	M.E. Shackleton K.A. Dafforn N.P. Murphy P. Greenfield M. Cassidy C.H. Besley
author_sort	M.E. Shackleton
title	How does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?
title_short	How does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?
title_full	How does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?
title_fullStr	How does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?
title_full_unstemmed	How does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?
title_sort	how does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?
publisher	Elsevier
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/f75a8c02aa4246f8834145fe1e56a927
work_keys_str_mv	AT meshackleton howdoesmoleculartaxonomyforderivingriverhealthindicescorrelatewithtraditionalmorphologicaltaxonomy AT kadafforn howdoesmoleculartaxonomyforderivingriverhealthindicescorrelatewithtraditionalmorphologicaltaxonomy AT npmurphy howdoesmoleculartaxonomyforderivingriverhealthindicescorrelatewithtraditionalmorphologicaltaxonomy AT pgreenfield howdoesmoleculartaxonomyforderivingriverhealthindicescorrelatewithtraditionalmorphologicaltaxonomy AT mcassidy howdoesmoleculartaxonomyforderivingriverhealthindicescorrelatewithtraditionalmorphologicaltaxonomy AT chbesley howdoesmoleculartaxonomyforderivingriverhealthindicescorrelatewithtraditionalmorphologicaltaxonomy
_version_	1718405760885456896

How does molecular taxonomy for deriving river health indices correlate with traditional morphological taxonomy?

Ejemplares similares