Dataset Information

Pooling size sorted Malaise trap fractions to maximize taxon recovery with metabarcoding

ABSTRACT:

Background

Small and rare specimens can remain undetected when metabarcoding is applied on bulk samples with a high specimen size heterogeneity. This is especially critical for Malaise trap samples, where most of the biodiversity is contributed by small taxa with low biomass. The separation of samples in different size fractions for downstream analysis is one possibility to increase detection of small and rare taxa. However, experiments systematically testing different size sorting approaches and subsequent proportional pooling of fractions are lacking, but would provide important information for the optimization of metabarcoding protocols. We set out to find a size sorting strategy for Malaise trap samples that maximizes taxonomic recovery but remains scalable and time efficient.

Methods

Three Malaise trap samples were sorted into four size classes using dry sieving. Each fraction was homogenized and lysed. The corresponding lysates were pooled to simulate unsorted samples. Pooling was additionally conducted in equal proportions and in four different proportions enriching the small size fraction of samples. DNA from the individual size classes as well as the pooled fractions was extracted and metabarcoded using the FwhF2 and Fol-degen-rev primer set. Additionally, alternative wet sieving strategies were explored.

Results

The small size fractions harboured the highest diversity and were best represented when pooling in favour of small specimens. Metabarcoding of unsorted samples decreases taxon recovery compared to size sorted samples. A size separation into only two fractions (below 4 mm and above) can double taxon recovery compared to not size sorting. However, increasing the sequencing depth 3- to 4-fold can also increase taxon recovery to levels comparable with size sorting, but remains biased towards biomass rich taxa in the sample.

Conclusion

We demonstrate that size fractionation of Malaise trap bulk samples can increase taxon recovery. While results show distinct patterns, the lack of statistical support due to the limited number of samples processed is a limitation. Due to increased speed and lower risk of cross-contamination as well as specimen damage we recommend wet sieving and proportional pooling of the lysates in favour of the small size fraction (80–90% volume). However, for large-scale projects with time constraints, increasing sequencing depth is an alternative solution.

SUBMITTER: Elbrecht V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8500090 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:With increased application of DNA metabarcoding in biodiversity assessment, various laboratory protocols have been optimized, and their further evaluation is subject of current research. Homogenization of bulk samples and subsequent DNA extraction from a subsample of destructed tissue is a common first stage of the metabarcoding process. This can either be conducted using sample material soaked in a storage fixative, e.g., ethanol (here referred to as "wet" treatment) or from dried individuals ("dry"). However, it remains uncertain if perfect mixing and equal distribution of DNA within the tube is ensured during homogenization and to what extent incomplete mixing and resulting variations in tissue composition affect diversity assessments if only a fraction of the destructed sample is processed in the downstream metabarcoding workflow. Here we investigated the efficiency of homogenization under wet and dry conditions and tested how variations in destructed tissue composition might affect diversity assessments of complex arthropod samples. We considered five time intervals of Malaise trap bulk samples and process nine different subsamples of homogenized tissue (20 mg each) in both treatments. Results indicate a more consistent diversity assessment from dried material, but at the cost of a higher processing time. Both approaches detected comparable OTU diversity and revealed similar taxa compositions in a single tissue extraction. With an increased number of tissue subsamples during DNA extraction, OTU diversity increased for both approaches, especially for highly diverse samples obtained during the summer. Here, particularly the detection of small and low-biomass taxa increased. The processing of multiple subsamples in the metabarcoding protocol can therefore be a helpful procedure to enhance diversity estimates and counteract taxonomic bias in biodiversity assessments. However, the process induces higher costs and time effort and the application in large-scale biodiversity assessment, e.g., in monitoring schemes needs to be considered on project-specific prospects.

Project description:BackgroundDespite Sweden's strong entomological tradition, large portions of its insect fauna remain poorly known. As part of the Swedish Taxonomy Initiative, launched in 2002 to document all multi-cellular species occurring in the country, the first taxonomically-broad inventory of the country's insect fauna was initiated, the Swedish Malaise Trap Project (SMTP). In total, 73 Malaise traps were deployed at 55 localities representing a wide range of habitats across the country. Most traps were run continuously from 2003 to 2006 or for a substantial part of that time period. The total catch is estimated to contain 20 million insects, distributed over 1,919 samples (Karlsson et al. 2020). The samples have been sorted into more than 300 taxonomic units, which are made available for expert identification. Thus far, more than 100 taxonomists have been involved in identifying the sorted material, recording the presence of 4,000 species. One third of these had not been recorded from Sweden before and 700 have tentatively been identified as new to science.New informationHere, we describe the SMTP dataset, published through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). Data on the sorted material are available in the "SMTP Collection Inventory" dataset. It currently includes more than 130,000 records of taxonomically-sorted samples. Data on the identified material are published using the Darwin Core standard for sample-based data. That information is divided up into group-specific datasets, as the sample set processed for each group is different and in most cases non-overlapping. The current data are divided into 79 taxonomic datasets, largely corresponding to taxonomic sorting fractions. The orders Diptera and Hymenoptera together comprise about 90% of the specimens in the material and these orders are mainly sorted to family or subfamily. The remaining insect taxa are mostly sorted to the order level. In total, the 79 datasets currently available comprise around 165,000 specimens, that is, about 1% of the total catch. However, the data are now accumulating rapidly and will be published continuously. The SMTP dataset is unique in that it contains a large proportion of data on previously poorly-known taxa in the Diptera and Hymenoptera.