4.7 Article

Using metabarcoding to ask if easily collected soil and leaf-litter samples can be used as a general biodiversity indicator

期刊

ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS
卷 46, 期 -, 页码 379-389

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.06.028

关键词

Soil fauna; Leaf litter; DNA barcoding; Biodiversity; Restoration ecology; Climate change; Metabarcoding; Tropical forest; Systematic conservation planning; Surveillance monitoring; Targeted monitoring

资金

  1. Naturalis Biodiversity Center
  2. German Agency for International Cooperation
  3. German Ministry for Economic Cooperation project MMC (Making the Mekong Connected) [08.78603-001.00]
  4. Yunnan Province [20080A001]
  5. Chinese Academy of Sciences [0902281081, KSCX2-YW-Z-1027]
  6. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31170498]
  7. Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China [2012FY110800]
  8. University of East Anglia
  9. State Key Laboratory of Genetic Resources and Evolution at the Kunming Institute of Zoology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The targeted sequencing of taxonomically informative genetic markers, sometimes known as metabarcoding, allows eukaryote biodiversity to be measured rapidly, cheaply, comprehensively, repeatedly, and verifiably. Metabarcoding helps to remove the taxonomic impediment, which refers to the great logistical difficulties of describing and identifying species, and thus promises to improve our ability to detect and respond to changes in the natural environment. Now, sampling has become a rate-limiting step in biodiversity measurement, and in an effort to reduce turnaround time, we use arthropod samples from southern China and Vietnam to ask whether soil, leaf litter, and aboveground samples provide similar ecological information. A soil or leaf-litter sample can be collected in minutes, whereas an aboveground sample, such as from Malaise traps or canopy fogging, can require days to set up and run, during which time they are subject to theft, damage, and deliberate contamination. Here we show that while the taxonomic compositions of soil and leaf-litter samples are very different from aboveground samples, both types of samples provide similar ecological information, in terms of ranking sites by species richness and differentiating sites by beta diversity. In fact, leaf-litter samples appear to be as or more powerful than Malaise-trap and canopy-fogging samples at detecting habitat differences. We propose that metabarcoded leaf-litter and soil samples be widely tested as a candidate method for rapid environmental monitoring in terrestrial ecosystems. (C) 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据