Loading…

Estimation of biodiversity metrics by environmental DNA metabarcoding compared with visual and capture surveys of river fish communities

Information on α‐ (local), β‐ (between habitats), and γ‐ (regional) diversity is fundamental to understanding biodiversity as well as the function and stability of community dynamics. Methods like environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding are currently considered useful to investigate biodiversity. We...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Freshwater biology 2021-07, Vol.66 (7), p.1257-1266
Main Authors: Doi, Hideyuki, Inui, Ryutei, Matsuoka, Shunsuke, Akamatsu, Yoshihisa, Goto, Masuji, Kono, Takanori
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-1ea407132203164f17c8a538ab3a5a5aa7c0e1d322814dad9d467038da5edfd03
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-1ea407132203164f17c8a538ab3a5a5aa7c0e1d322814dad9d467038da5edfd03
container_end_page 1266
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1257
container_title Freshwater biology
container_volume 66
creator Doi, Hideyuki
Inui, Ryutei
Matsuoka, Shunsuke
Akamatsu, Yoshihisa
Goto, Masuji
Kono, Takanori
description Information on α‐ (local), β‐ (between habitats), and γ‐ (regional) diversity is fundamental to understanding biodiversity as well as the function and stability of community dynamics. Methods like environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding are currently considered useful to investigate biodiversity. We compared the performance of eDNA metabarcoding with visual and capture surveys for estimating α‐ and γ‐diversity of river fish communities, and nestedness and turnover in particular. In five rivers across west Japan, by comparison to visual/capture surveys, eDNA metabarcoding detected more species in the study sites (i.e. α‐diversity). Consequently, the overall number of species in the region (i.e. γ‐diversity) was higher. In particular, the species found by visual/capture surveys were encompassed by those detected by eDNA metabarcoding. Estimates of community diversity within rivers differed between survey methods. Although we found that the methods show similar levels of community nestedness and turnover within the rivers, visual/capture surveys showed more distinct community differences from upstream to downstream. Our results suggest that eDNA metabarcoding may be a suitable method for community assemblage analysis, especially for understanding regional community patterns, for fish monitoring in rivers.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/fwb.13714
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2540099975</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2540099975</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-1ea407132203164f17c8a538ab3a5a5aa7c0e1d322814dad9d467038da5edfd03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kL1OwzAUhS0EEqUw8AaWmBjS2rEdJ2OBFpAqWECMkWM71FXzg-2kyhvw2DiElXuHO5zv3CMdAK4xWuAwy_JYLDDhmJ6AGSYJi2Ia81MwQ4gmEUMcnYML5_YIoZTxeAa-186bSnjT1LApYWEaZXptnfEDrLS3RjpYDFDXvbFNXenaiwN8eFmNoiiElYGvP6FsqlZYreDR-B3sjesCJmoFpWh9ZzV0ne314MYMOwbA0rjdaKu62nij3SU4K8XB6au_Owfvm_Xb_VO0fX18vl9tIxlnnEZYC4o4JnGMCE5oiblMBSOpKIhgYQWXSGMV9BRTJVSmaMIRSZVgWpUKkTm4mf62tvnqtPP5vulsHSLzmFGEsizjLFC3EyVt45zVZd7aUJMdcozyseg8FJ3_Fh3Y5cQezUEP_4P55uNucvwAA4GCOw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2540099975</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Estimation of biodiversity metrics by environmental DNA metabarcoding compared with visual and capture surveys of river fish communities</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Doi, Hideyuki ; Inui, Ryutei ; Matsuoka, Shunsuke ; Akamatsu, Yoshihisa ; Goto, Masuji ; Kono, Takanori</creator><creatorcontrib>Doi, Hideyuki ; Inui, Ryutei ; Matsuoka, Shunsuke ; Akamatsu, Yoshihisa ; Goto, Masuji ; Kono, Takanori</creatorcontrib><description>Information on α‐ (local), β‐ (between habitats), and γ‐ (regional) diversity is fundamental to understanding biodiversity as well as the function and stability of community dynamics. Methods like environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding are currently considered useful to investigate biodiversity. We compared the performance of eDNA metabarcoding with visual and capture surveys for estimating α‐ and γ‐diversity of river fish communities, and nestedness and turnover in particular. In five rivers across west Japan, by comparison to visual/capture surveys, eDNA metabarcoding detected more species in the study sites (i.e. α‐diversity). Consequently, the overall number of species in the region (i.e. γ‐diversity) was higher. In particular, the species found by visual/capture surveys were encompassed by those detected by eDNA metabarcoding. Estimates of community diversity within rivers differed between survey methods. Although we found that the methods show similar levels of community nestedness and turnover within the rivers, visual/capture surveys showed more distinct community differences from upstream to downstream. Our results suggest that eDNA metabarcoding may be a suitable method for community assemblage analysis, especially for understanding regional community patterns, for fish monitoring in rivers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0046-5070</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2427</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/fwb.13714</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>alpha and gamma diversity ; Biodiversity ; community ; Community composition ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; DNA ; Downstream effects ; Dynamic stability ; eDNA ; Environmental DNA ; Environmental monitoring ; Fish ; Methods ; nestedness ; Polls &amp; surveys ; Rivers ; Species ; Species diversity ; Surveying ; Surveys ; turnover</subject><ispartof>Freshwater biology, 2021-07, Vol.66 (7), p.1257-1266</ispartof><rights>2021 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-1ea407132203164f17c8a538ab3a5a5aa7c0e1d322814dad9d467038da5edfd03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-1ea407132203164f17c8a538ab3a5a5aa7c0e1d322814dad9d467038da5edfd03</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3723-8800 ; 0000-0002-2701-3982</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Doi, Hideyuki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inui, Ryutei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsuoka, Shunsuke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akamatsu, Yoshihisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goto, Masuji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kono, Takanori</creatorcontrib><title>Estimation of biodiversity metrics by environmental DNA metabarcoding compared with visual and capture surveys of river fish communities</title><title>Freshwater biology</title><description>Information on α‐ (local), β‐ (between habitats), and γ‐ (regional) diversity is fundamental to understanding biodiversity as well as the function and stability of community dynamics. Methods like environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding are currently considered useful to investigate biodiversity. We compared the performance of eDNA metabarcoding with visual and capture surveys for estimating α‐ and γ‐diversity of river fish communities, and nestedness and turnover in particular. In five rivers across west Japan, by comparison to visual/capture surveys, eDNA metabarcoding detected more species in the study sites (i.e. α‐diversity). Consequently, the overall number of species in the region (i.e. γ‐diversity) was higher. In particular, the species found by visual/capture surveys were encompassed by those detected by eDNA metabarcoding. Estimates of community diversity within rivers differed between survey methods. Although we found that the methods show similar levels of community nestedness and turnover within the rivers, visual/capture surveys showed more distinct community differences from upstream to downstream. Our results suggest that eDNA metabarcoding may be a suitable method for community assemblage analysis, especially for understanding regional community patterns, for fish monitoring in rivers.</description><subject>alpha and gamma diversity</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>community</subject><subject>Community composition</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>Downstream effects</subject><subject>Dynamic stability</subject><subject>eDNA</subject><subject>Environmental DNA</subject><subject>Environmental monitoring</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>nestedness</subject><subject>Polls &amp; surveys</subject><subject>Rivers</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Species diversity</subject><subject>Surveying</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>turnover</subject><issn>0046-5070</issn><issn>1365-2427</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kL1OwzAUhS0EEqUw8AaWmBjS2rEdJ2OBFpAqWECMkWM71FXzg-2kyhvw2DiElXuHO5zv3CMdAK4xWuAwy_JYLDDhmJ6AGSYJi2Ia81MwQ4gmEUMcnYML5_YIoZTxeAa-186bSnjT1LApYWEaZXptnfEDrLS3RjpYDFDXvbFNXenaiwN8eFmNoiiElYGvP6FsqlZYreDR-B3sjesCJmoFpWh9ZzV0ne314MYMOwbA0rjdaKu62nij3SU4K8XB6au_Owfvm_Xb_VO0fX18vl9tIxlnnEZYC4o4JnGMCE5oiblMBSOpKIhgYQWXSGMV9BRTJVSmaMIRSZVgWpUKkTm4mf62tvnqtPP5vulsHSLzmFGEsizjLFC3EyVt45zVZd7aUJMdcozyseg8FJ3_Fh3Y5cQezUEP_4P55uNucvwAA4GCOw</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Doi, Hideyuki</creator><creator>Inui, Ryutei</creator><creator>Matsuoka, Shunsuke</creator><creator>Akamatsu, Yoshihisa</creator><creator>Goto, Masuji</creator><creator>Kono, Takanori</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M7N</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3723-8800</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2701-3982</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>Estimation of biodiversity metrics by environmental DNA metabarcoding compared with visual and capture surveys of river fish communities</title><author>Doi, Hideyuki ; Inui, Ryutei ; Matsuoka, Shunsuke ; Akamatsu, Yoshihisa ; Goto, Masuji ; Kono, Takanori</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-1ea407132203164f17c8a538ab3a5a5aa7c0e1d322814dad9d467038da5edfd03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>alpha and gamma diversity</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>community</topic><topic>Community composition</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>Downstream effects</topic><topic>Dynamic stability</topic><topic>eDNA</topic><topic>Environmental DNA</topic><topic>Environmental monitoring</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>nestedness</topic><topic>Polls &amp; surveys</topic><topic>Rivers</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Species diversity</topic><topic>Surveying</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>turnover</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Doi, Hideyuki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inui, Ryutei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsuoka, Shunsuke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akamatsu, Yoshihisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goto, Masuji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kono, Takanori</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences &amp; Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><jtitle>Freshwater biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Doi, Hideyuki</au><au>Inui, Ryutei</au><au>Matsuoka, Shunsuke</au><au>Akamatsu, Yoshihisa</au><au>Goto, Masuji</au><au>Kono, Takanori</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Estimation of biodiversity metrics by environmental DNA metabarcoding compared with visual and capture surveys of river fish communities</atitle><jtitle>Freshwater biology</jtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>66</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1257</spage><epage>1266</epage><pages>1257-1266</pages><issn>0046-5070</issn><eissn>1365-2427</eissn><abstract>Information on α‐ (local), β‐ (between habitats), and γ‐ (regional) diversity is fundamental to understanding biodiversity as well as the function and stability of community dynamics. Methods like environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding are currently considered useful to investigate biodiversity. We compared the performance of eDNA metabarcoding with visual and capture surveys for estimating α‐ and γ‐diversity of river fish communities, and nestedness and turnover in particular. In five rivers across west Japan, by comparison to visual/capture surveys, eDNA metabarcoding detected more species in the study sites (i.e. α‐diversity). Consequently, the overall number of species in the region (i.e. γ‐diversity) was higher. In particular, the species found by visual/capture surveys were encompassed by those detected by eDNA metabarcoding. Estimates of community diversity within rivers differed between survey methods. Although we found that the methods show similar levels of community nestedness and turnover within the rivers, visual/capture surveys showed more distinct community differences from upstream to downstream. Our results suggest that eDNA metabarcoding may be a suitable method for community assemblage analysis, especially for understanding regional community patterns, for fish monitoring in rivers.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/fwb.13714</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3723-8800</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2701-3982</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0046-5070
ispartof Freshwater biology, 2021-07, Vol.66 (7), p.1257-1266
issn 0046-5070
1365-2427
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2540099975
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects alpha and gamma diversity
Biodiversity
community
Community composition
Deoxyribonucleic acid
DNA
Downstream effects
Dynamic stability
eDNA
Environmental DNA
Environmental monitoring
Fish
Methods
nestedness
Polls & surveys
Rivers
Species
Species diversity
Surveying
Surveys
turnover
title Estimation of biodiversity metrics by environmental DNA metabarcoding compared with visual and capture surveys of river fish communities
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T08%3A29%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Estimation%20of%20biodiversity%20metrics%20by%20environmental%20DNA%20metabarcoding%20compared%20with%20visual%20and%20capture%20surveys%20of%20river%20fish%20communities&rft.jtitle=Freshwater%20biology&rft.au=Doi,%20Hideyuki&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=66&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1257&rft.epage=1266&rft.pages=1257-1266&rft.issn=0046-5070&rft.eissn=1365-2427&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/fwb.13714&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2540099975%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-1ea407132203164f17c8a538ab3a5a5aa7c0e1d322814dad9d467038da5edfd03%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2540099975&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true