Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Other ORP type . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Other ORP type . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other ORP type . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Scripts and supplementary figures for A Comparative Analysis of eDNA Metabarcoding and Field Surveys: Exploring Freshwater Plant Communities in Rivers

Authors: Espinosa Prieto, Armando; Hardion, Laurent; Debortoli, Nicolas; Bournonville, Thibaut; Mathot, Thibaut; Jonathan, Marescaux; Chanez, Etienne; +2 Authors

Scripts and supplementary figures for A Comparative Analysis of eDNA Metabarcoding and Field Surveys: Exploring Freshwater Plant Communities in Rivers

Abstract

While environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding holds promise as a holistic approach to assess vegetation changes and community composition across diverse spatial and temporal scales, systematic investigations of its efficacy compared to conventional field surveys remain scarce in the literature. The present study explores the differences in plant diversity recovered from field surveys and captured with a multi-marker eDNA metabarcoding approach (two nrDNA ITS1 and ITS2, and two cpDNA rbcL and trnL) from river water samples. The eDNA metabarcoding approach retrieved 46 aquatic plants (hydrophytes and helophytes) and 245 terrestrial plants, compared to 24 and 127 species identified from field surveys. On average, eDNA samples collected immediately downstream of the survey sites recovered 43% and 39% of the aquatic and terrestrial species observed, respectively. Discrepancies were explained by differences in taxonomic resolution, the stochasticity of the retrieval of rare and elusive species, and the presence of reference sequences. We found a significant positive correlation between spatial and community distances at scales ranging from 2-9 km and identified turnover as the driving force of these differences. Metabarcoding demonstrated sensitivity to community changes and both approaches converge on a similar community structure. Interestingly, eDNA samples collected immediately upstream of the survey sites exhibited significant species overlap with the downstream samples (c. 100 m apart). Overall our results demonstrate that, with adequate sampling and a multi-marker metabarcoding approach, eDNA has the potential to approximate catchment gamma diversity while still being informative of the local flora.

Keywords

aquatic plants, biomonitoring, obitools, riverine beta diversity, bioinformatics, eDNA survey, metabarcoding pipeline, freshwater plant communities, molecular ecology, environmental DNA, biodiversity assessment, multi-marker metabarcoding

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities