Kilian Isabel C, Kirse Ameli, Peters Ralph S, Bourlat Sarah J, Fonseca Vera G, Wägele Wolfgang J, Hamm Andrée, Mengual Ximo
Museum Koenig Bonn Leibniz Institute for the Analysis of Biodiversity Change Bonn Germany.
Agroecology and Organic Farming Group, Institute of Crop Science and Resource Conservation (INRES), Faculty of Agriculture University of Bonn Bonn Germany.
Ecol Evol. 2025 Jan 23;15(1):e70770. doi: 10.1002/ece3.70770. eCollection 2025 Jan.
In recent years, DNA metabarcoding has been used for a more efficient assessment of bulk samples. However, there remains a paucity of studies examining potential disparities in species identification methodologies. Here, we explore the outcomes of diverse clustering and filtering techniques on data from a non-destructive metabarcoding approach, compared to species-level morphological identification of Brachycera (Diptera) and Hymenoptera of two bulk samples collected with Malaise traps. The study evaluated four distinct approaches, namely clustering to Amplicon Sequence Variants (ASVs) or ASVs clustered to Operational Taxonomic Units (OTUs) coupled with subsequent filtering using the LULU algorithm at 84% and 96% minimum match. In total, 114 species of Brachycera (35 families) and 85 species of Hymenoptera (27 families) were identified morphologically. Depending on the selected approach, DNA metabarcoding results strongly varied in terms of detected molecular units blasted to brachyceran and hymenopteran species. For Brachycera, ASVs clustered into OTUs followed by LULU using a 96% minimum match (OTU96) inferred the number of molecular units closest to the number of morphologically identified species. Using Syrphidae as an exemplary family, we found an overlap ranging from 9% to 81% between the morphological identification and the different clustering and filtering approaches, OTU96 being also here the closest one. For Hymenoptera, while OTU96 also yielded the highest number of molecular units, it was still considerably low compared to the number of morphologically identified species. Our results show that metabarcoding methodology needs to be significantly improved to be applied to Hymenoptera. Conversely, for Brachycera, we acknowledge the promise of employing a non-destructive metabarcoding approach, incorporating ASV clustering into OTUs and filtering with LULU, to derive dependable species lists. Such lists hold significant potential for applications in biomonitoring, conservation efforts, and other related fields.
近年来,DNA宏条形码技术已被用于更高效地评估大量样本。然而,研究物种鉴定方法潜在差异的研究仍然匮乏。在这里,我们探索了多种聚类和过滤技术对来自非破坏性宏条形码方法数据的结果,与用马氏网诱捕的两个大量样本中的短角亚目(双翅目)和膜翅目的物种水平形态鉴定进行比较。该研究评估了四种不同的方法,即聚类到扩增子序列变体(ASV)或ASV聚类到操作分类单元(OTU),随后使用LULU算法在84%和96%的最小匹配度下进行过滤。总共在形态上鉴定出114种短角亚目(35科)和85种膜翅目(27科)。根据所选方法,DNA宏条形码的结果在与短角亚目和膜翅目物种比对的检测分子单元方面差异很大。对于短角亚目,ASV聚类到OTU,然后使用96%的最小匹配度进行LULU过滤(OTU96)推断出的分子单元数量最接近形态鉴定的物种数量。以食蚜蝇科作为一个示例性科,我们发现形态鉴定与不同聚类和过滤方法之间的重叠范围为9%至81%,OTU96在这里也是最接近的一个。对于膜翅目,虽然OTU96也产生了最多的分子单元,但与形态鉴定的物种数量相比仍然相当低。我们的结果表明,宏条形码方法需要显著改进才能应用于膜翅目。相反,对于短角亚目,我们认可采用非破坏性宏条形码方法的前景,即将ASV聚类到OTU并使用LULU进行过滤,以得出可靠的物种列表。这样的列表在生物监测、保护工作和其他相关领域具有巨大的应用潜力。