The Core of the Matter—Importance of Identification Method and Biological Replication for Benthic Marine Monitoring

Benthic macrofauna are important and widely used biological indicators of marine ecosystems as they have limited mobility and therefore integrate the effects of local environmental stressors over time. Recently, environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis has provided a potentially more resource-efficient approach for benthic biomonitoring than traditional morphology-based methods. Several studies have compared eDNA with morphology-based monitoring, but few have compared the two approaches using the exact same sediment cores. In addition, the meiofauna and pelagic organisms obtained as 'bycatch' using eDNA have largely been disregarded from comparisons. Here, we address these shortcomings through comparative invertebrate analyses of six sediment sample replicates from each of four stations in Denmark, using eDNA metabarcoding and morphological identification. Our results revealed large variation between the six replicates for both methods and little overlap in taxon compositions between methods. While the morphological dataset was dominated by molluscs and annelids, the eDNA dataset was dominated by arthropods and annelids. Using community composition data, we found that sampling stations could be distinguished both with eDNA and morphology. Finally, we inferred expected total richness from extrapolated accumulation curves of detected taxa from each method. This indicated that eDNA metabarcoding requires less replication than morphology for maximum coverage of diversity to be reached. However, both methods required high levels of replication, and our results on taxonomic composition add to the evidence that morphological and eDNA-based methods should preferably be used as complimentary tools for marine bioassessment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ecology and Evolution
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.70556
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.29

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Core of the Matter—Importance of Identification Method and Biological Replication for Benthic Marine Monitoring

Sune Agersnap, Mary Susanne Wisz, Eva Egelyng Sigsgaard, Henrik Glenner et al.
5 citations
Ecology and Evolution
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
2.29
article

The Core of the Matter—Importance of Identification Method and Biological Replication for Benthic Marine Monitoring

Sune Agersnap, Mary Susanne Wisz, Eva Egelyng Sigsgaard, Henrik Glenner, Philip Francis Thomsen, Mads Reinholdt Jensen, Marcelo de Paula Ávila
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Benthic macrofauna are important and widely used biological indicators of marine ecosystems as they have limited mobility and therefore integrate the effects of local environmental stressors over time. Recently, environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis has provided a potentially more resource-efficient approach for benthic biomonitoring than traditional morphology-based methods. Several studies have compared eDNA with morphology-based monitoring, but few have compared the two approaches using the exact same sediment cores. In addition, the meiofauna and pelagic organisms obtained as 'bycatch' using eDNA have largely been disregarded from comparisons. Here, we address these shortcomings through comparative invertebrate analyses of six sediment sample replicates from each of four stations in Denmark, using eDNA metabarcoding and morphological identification. Our results revealed large variation between the six replicates for both methods and little overlap in taxon compositions between methods. While the morphological dataset was dominated by molluscs and annelids, the eDNA dataset was dominated by arthropods and annelids. Using community composition data, we found that sampling stations could be distinguished both with eDNA and morphology. Finally, we inferred expected total richness from extrapolated accumulation curves of detected taxa from each method. This indicated that eDNA metabarcoding requires less replication than morphology for maximum coverage of diversity to be reached. However, both methods required high levels of replication, and our results on taxonomic composition add to the evidence that morphological and eDNA-based methods should preferably be used as complimentary tools for marine bioassessment.

Ecology and EvolutionVol. 14(11)
University of Copenhagen (DK), World Maritime University (SE), Aarhus University (DK), University of Bergen (NO), UiT The Arctic University of Norway (NO)
Aarhus Universitet, Velux Fonden, Carlsbergfondet
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
2.29
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.