Fish eDNA metabarcoding from aquatic biofilm samples: Methodological aspects

Fish eDNA metabarcoding is usually performed from filtered water samples. The volume of filtered water depends on the study scope and can rapidly become time consuming according to the number of samples that have to be processed. To avoid time allocated to filtration, passive DNA samplers have been used to recover fish eDNA from marine environments faster. In freshwater ecosystems, aquatic biofilms were used to catch eDNA from macroinvertebrates. Here, we test the capacity of aquatic biofilms to entrap fish eDNA in a large lake and, therefore, the possibility to perform fish eDNA metabarcoding from this matrix compared to the traditional fish eDNA approach from filtered water samples. Methodological aspects of the use of aquatic biofilms for fish eDNA metabarcoding (e.g. PCR replicates, biological replicates, bioinformatics pipeline, reference database and taxonomic assignment) were validated against a mock community. When using biofilms from habitats sheltered from wind and waves, biofilm and water approach provided similar inventories. Richness and diversity were comparable between both approaches. Approaches differed only for rare taxa. Our results illustrate the capacity of aquatic biofilms to act as passive eDNA samplers of fish eDNA and, therefore, the possibility to use biofilms to monitor fish communities efficiently from biofilms. Furthermore, our results open up avenues of research to study a diversity of biological groups (among which bioindicators as diatoms, macroinvertebrates and fish) from eDNA isolated from a single environmental matrix reducing sampling efforts, analysis time and costs.

Automated summary

The study found that aquatic biofilms can effectively capture fish eDNA, providing a faster and more efficient way to monitor fish communities. Compared to traditional water filtration methods, biofilms showed similar richness and diversity, with differences mainly observed in rare taxa.