Towards a Standardized Operating Procedure for eDNA-Based Biomonitoring in Coastal Marine Salmon Aquaculture

Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences Environmental DNA Pub Date : 2024-09-28 DOI:10.1002/edn3.70014
Mahshid Oladi, Thomas A. Wilding, Adam Wyness, Thorsten Stoeck
{"title":"Towards a Standardized Operating Procedure for eDNA-Based Biomonitoring in Coastal Marine Salmon Aquaculture","authors":"Mahshid Oladi,&nbsp;Thomas A. Wilding,&nbsp;Adam Wyness,&nbsp;Thorsten Stoeck","doi":"10.1002/edn3.70014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The marine aquaculture industry and regulators are in the process of implementing environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding of microbial communities for compliance monitoring. This requires standardization of sampling, laboratory, and data analysis protocols. Towards this goal, we in this study completed two further milestones using samples collected from two Scottish salmon farms: (i) We tested the effect of using two different PCR protocols (i.e., different DNA polymerases, master mixes, and annealing temperatures), which are frequently being used in eDNA biomonitoring of aquaculture installations, for the amplification of the taxonomic marker gene (V3-V4 hypervariable region of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene). (ii) We quantified sampling background noise obtained from eDNA samples and statistically compared results with the sampling bias observed in macrofaunal samples from the same source sediments. We detected differences in bacterial community structures resulting from the performance of different PCR protocols, profoundly influencing the interpretation of biomonitoring results. Furthermore, we found that sampling-induced errors for eDNA samples were similar to errors for macrofaunal samples collected according to compliance monitoring protocol (~25% variability in both cases). Finally, we showed that within-grab variances of microbial community structures were in the same order of magnitude (less than 10× difference in all cases) as the one obtained from replicate grabs collected from the same locale (impact category). Based on our findings, we suggest using a consistent PCR protocol for biomonitoring efforts to improve the comparability of results, especially when different service providers are conducting the biomonitoring. We propose a sampling scheme to be considered in eDNA biomonitoring that includes taking three replicate grabs at each locale, with one replicate sample from each grab. This minimizes sampling-induced errors and makes upcoming eDNA-based monitoring results comparable with previous compliance monitoring results obtained from macrofaunal data.</p>","PeriodicalId":52828,"journal":{"name":"Environmental DNA","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/edn3.70014","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental DNA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/edn3.70014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The marine aquaculture industry and regulators are in the process of implementing environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding of microbial communities for compliance monitoring. This requires standardization of sampling, laboratory, and data analysis protocols. Towards this goal, we in this study completed two further milestones using samples collected from two Scottish salmon farms: (i) We tested the effect of using two different PCR protocols (i.e., different DNA polymerases, master mixes, and annealing temperatures), which are frequently being used in eDNA biomonitoring of aquaculture installations, for the amplification of the taxonomic marker gene (V3-V4 hypervariable region of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene). (ii) We quantified sampling background noise obtained from eDNA samples and statistically compared results with the sampling bias observed in macrofaunal samples from the same source sediments. We detected differences in bacterial community structures resulting from the performance of different PCR protocols, profoundly influencing the interpretation of biomonitoring results. Furthermore, we found that sampling-induced errors for eDNA samples were similar to errors for macrofaunal samples collected according to compliance monitoring protocol (~25% variability in both cases). Finally, we showed that within-grab variances of microbial community structures were in the same order of magnitude (less than 10× difference in all cases) as the one obtained from replicate grabs collected from the same locale (impact category). Based on our findings, we suggest using a consistent PCR protocol for biomonitoring efforts to improve the comparability of results, especially when different service providers are conducting the biomonitoring. We propose a sampling scheme to be considered in eDNA biomonitoring that includes taking three replicate grabs at each locale, with one replicate sample from each grab. This minimizes sampling-induced errors and makes upcoming eDNA-based monitoring results comparable with previous compliance monitoring results obtained from macrofaunal data.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
实现沿海海水鲑鱼养殖中基于 eDNA 的生物监测标准化操作程序
海洋水产养殖业和监管机构正在对微生物群落实施环境 DNA (eDNA) 代谢编码,以进行合规性监测。这需要采样、实验室和数据分析协议的标准化。为实现这一目标,我们在本研究中利用从苏格兰两个鲑鱼养殖场采集的样本完成了两个新的里程碑:(i) 我们测试了使用两种不同的 PCR 方案(即不同的 DNA 聚合酶、混合母液和退火温度)扩增分类标记基因(细菌 16S rRNA 基因的 V3-V4 超变区)的效果,这两种方案在水产养殖设施的 eDNA 生物监测中经常使用。(ii) 我们对从 eDNA 样品中获得的取样背景噪声进行了量化,并将结果与从同一源沉积物中观察到的大型底栖动物样本的取样偏差进行了统计比较。我们发现不同 PCR 方案的性能会导致细菌群落结构的差异,从而对生物监测结果的解释产生深远影响。此外,我们还发现,eDNA 样品的取样误差与根据合规性监测方案采集的大型底栖动物样本的误差相似(两者的变异率均为 25%)。最后,我们还发现,采集点内微生物群落结构的差异与从同一地点(影响类别)采集的重复采集点获得的差异处于同一数量级(在所有情况下差异均小于 10 倍)。根据我们的研究结果,我们建议在生物监测工作中使用一致的 PCR 方案,以提高结果的可比性,尤其是在不同的服务提供商进行生物监测时。我们建议在 eDNA 生物监测中考虑一种采样方案,包括在每个地点重复采集三次,每次采集一个样本。这样可以最大限度地减少取样引起的误差,并使即将进行的基于 eDNA 的监测结果与以前从大型底栖生物数据中获得的合规性监测结果具有可比性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental DNA
Environmental DNA Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Bottom Trawling and Multi-Marker eDNA Metabarcoding Surveys Reveal Highly Diverse Vertebrate and Crustacean Communities: A Case Study in an Urbanized Subtropical Estuary Evaluation of a Nanopore Sequencing Strategy on Bacterial Communities From Marine Sediments Current Trends in Biophysical Modeling of eDNA Dynamics for the Detection of Marine Species Validation of Environmental DNA for Estimating Proportional and Absolute Biomass
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1