Saranholi Bruno H, Rodriguez-Castro Karen G, Carvalho Carolina S, Chahad-Ehlers Samira, Gestich Carla C, Andrade Sónia C S, Freitas Patrícia D, Galetti Pedro M
Departamento de Genética e Evolução, Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, Brazil.
Facultad Ciencias Básicas e Ingeniería, Universidad de los Llanos, Villavicencio, Colombia.
Mol Ecol Resour. 2023 Nov;23(8):1790-1799. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.13851. Epub 2023 Aug 3.
Ingested-derived DNA (iDNA) from insects represents a powerful tool for assessing vertebrate diversity because insects are easy to sample, have a diverse diet and are widely distributed. Because of these advantages, the use of iDNA for detecting mammals has gained increasing attention. Here we aimed to compare the effectiveness of mosquitoes and flies to detect mammals with a small sampling effort in a semi-controlled area, a zoo that houses native and non-native species. We compared mosquitoes and flies regarding the number of mammal species detected, the amount of mammal sequence reads recovered, and the flight distance range for detecting mammals. We also verified if the combination of two mini-barcodes (12SrRNA and 16SrRNA) would perform better than either mini-barcode alone to inform local mammal biodiversity from iDNA. To capture mosquitoes and flies, we distributed insect traps in eight sampling points during 5 days. We identified 43 Operational Taxonomic Units from 10 orders, from the iDNA of 17 mosquitoes and 46 flies. There was no difference in the number of species recovered per individual insect between mosquitoes and flies, but the number of flies captured was higher, resulting in more mammal species recovered by flies. Eight species were recorded exclusively by mosquitoes and 20 by flies, suggesting that using both samplers would allow a more comprehensive screening of the biodiversity. The maximum distance recorded was 337 m for flies and 289 m for mosquitoes, but the average range distance did not differ between insect groups. Our assay proved to be efficient for mammal detection, considering the high number of species detected with a reduced sampling effort.
来自昆虫的摄食性DNA（iDNA）是评估脊椎动物多样性的有力工具，因为昆虫易于采样、食性多样且分布广泛。由于这些优势，利用iDNA检测哺乳动物越来越受到关注。在此，我们旨在比较蚊子和苍蝇在半控制区域（一个饲养本地和非本地物种的动物园）以少量采样工作检测哺乳动物的有效性。我们比较了蚊子和苍蝇在检测到的哺乳动物物种数量、回收的哺乳动物序列读数数量以及检测哺乳动物的飞行距离范围方面的情况。我们还验证了两个微型条形码（12SrRNA和16SrRNA）的组合是否比单独使用任何一个微型条形码在通过iDNA了解当地哺乳动物生物多样性方面表现更好。为了捕获蚊子和苍蝇，我们在5天内于8个采样点分布了昆虫陷阱。我们从17只蚊子和46只苍蝇的iDNA中鉴定出了来自10个目的43个操作分类单元。蚊子和苍蝇单个昆虫回收的物种数量没有差异，但捕获的苍蝇数量更多，导致苍蝇回收的哺乳动物物种更多。有8个物种仅由蚊子记录到，20个由苍蝇记录到，这表明使用两种采样器可以对生物多样性进行更全面的筛选。记录到的最大距离苍蝇为337米，蚊子为289米，但昆虫群体之间的平均范围距离没有差异。考虑到以减少的采样工作量检测到的物种数量众多，我们的检测方法被证明对哺乳动物检测是有效的。
