Application of Environmental DNA Metabarcoding to Spatiotemporal Finfish Community Assessment in a Temperate Embayment

Abstract

Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding was used to characterize finfish communities in the nearshore estuarine environment. Monthly sampling was conducted June-August 2017 at two sites with structured habitats: a natural rock reef and a shellfish aquaculture farm within the same coastal embayment of Long Island Sound (LIS), CT, United States. Seventeen common and 25 rare finfish taxa were detected using eDNA metabarcoding. Incomplete status of reference sequence databases for finfish species was identified as a methodological challenge. Confidence in molecular identification was improved appreciably through the use of publicly available data obtained from local trawling and seining surveys. Comparison between eDNA metabarcoding and trawling surveys on 6/27/2017, the only day when both data types were available, revealed more finfish species detected by eDNA metabarcoding. The high sensitivity of eDNA metabarcoding detected finfish species rarely observed in traditional surveys and showed the potential for this methodology to augment existing literature for finfish species distribution patterns and invasive species detection. Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMS) analysis of finfish communities achieved a low-stress, 2D solution, and revealed greater variation between samples collected from different months than samples collected from the two habitats. Similarly, permutational analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) found both month and the interaction term (month × site) significant, with the latter identifying site as significant only in July and August. Different finfish assemblages were significantly associated with each axis, axes representing temporal and spatial variations, respectively. Additionally, polycarbonate and nylon filters were compared to optimize the sampling method; finfish communities retrieved using the two types of filters were statistically indistinguishable by NMS analysis, although the filtration time for nylon filters was shorter. If the objective is to detect rare species, nylon filters are recommended over polycarbonate filters because of higher capture rates of rare taxa. Our study demonstrates the potential for applying eDNA metabarcoding as a stand-alone method to conduct finfish surveys with high sensitivity.

Multispecies models reveal that eDNA metabarcoding is more sensitive than backpack electrofishing for conducting fish surveys in freshwater streams

“…Species richness estimates were also higher using eDNA metabarcoding compared to electrofishing. This is consistent with the literature where methods were conducted concurrently (Liu et al., 2019; Mcdevitt et al., 2019; Sard et al., 2019; Shaw et al., 2016). However, using some markers and during some studies, species richness estimates have been lower compared to a traditional sampling method (Fujii et al., 2019).…”

Exploring the Use of Environmental DNA (eDNA) to Detect Animal Taxa in the Mesopelagic Zone

“…Given the close proximity of the CTD and MOCNESS sampling locations and times, and the temperature and salinity data that showed that the sampling locations belonged to the same water mass, we assume that the pool of biodiversity was similar for each sampling event and that the observed differences are due to sampling biases associated with each method. Our findings that many of the same taxa were recovered in both sampling approaches and that other taxa that were recovered in only one or the other approach, are also consistent with other studies that compare eDNA with other survey methods (Thomsen et al, 2016;Kelly et al, 2017;Sigsgaard et al, 2017;Closek et al, 2019;Liu et al, 2019).…”

Improved Environmental DNA Reference Library Detects Overlooked Marine Fishes in New Jersey, United States

“…Regarding other non-checklist taxa, the range of skilletfish extends to New Jersey (Murdy et al, 1997). A recent study found eDNA matching Pacific sand lance in Long Island Sound, and it is unknown whether this reflects species presence or an imperfect database (Liu et al, 2019). Single detections of the other two extra-limital fishes, butterfly kingfish and capelin, are also of uncertain significance.…”