» Articles » PMID: 37091562

Monitoring Insect Biodiversity and Comparison of Sampling Strategies Using Metabarcoding: A Case Study in the Yanshan Mountains, China

Overview
Journal Ecol Evol
Date 2023 Apr 24
PMID 37091562
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Insects are the richest and most diverse group of animals and yet there remains a lack, not only of systematic research into their distribution across some key regions of the planet, but of standardized sampling strategies for their study. The Yanshan Mountains, being the boundary range between the Inner Mongolian Plateau and the North China Plain, present an indispensable piece of the insect biodiversity puzzle: both requiring systematic study and offering opportunities for the development of standardized methodologies. This is the first use of DNA metabarcoding to survey the insect biodiversity of the Yanshan Mountains. The study focuses on differences of community composition among samples collected via different methods and from different habitat types. In total, 74 bulk samples were collected from five habitat types (scrubland, woodland, wetland, farmland and grassland) using three collection methods (sweep netting, Malaise traps and light traps). After DNA extraction, PCR amplification, sequencing and diversity analysis were performed, a total of 7427 Operational Taxonomic Units (OTUs) at ≥97% sequence similarity level were delimited, of which 7083 OTUs were identified as belonging to Insecta. Orthoptera, Diptera, Coleoptera and Hemiptera were found to be the dominant orders according to community composition analysis. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) analysis based on Bray-Curtis distances revealed highly divergent estimates of insect community composition among samples differentiated by the collection method ( = .524802,  = .001), but nonsignificant difference among samples differentiated according to habitat ( = .051102,  = .078). The study therefore appears to indicate that the concurrent use of varied collection methods is essential to the accurate monitoring of insect biodiversity.

Citing Articles

Upscaling biodiversity monitoring: Metabarcoding estimates 31,846 insect species from Malaise traps across Germany.

Buchner D, Sinclair J, Ayasse M, Beermann A, Buse J, Dziock F Mol Ecol Resour. 2024; 25(1):e14023.

PMID: 39364584 PMC: 11646302. DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.14023.


Monitoring insect biodiversity and comparison of sampling strategies using metabarcoding: A case study in the Yanshan Mountains, China.

Li M, Lei T, Wang G, Zhang D, Liu H, Zhang Z Ecol Evol. 2023; 13(4):e10031.

PMID: 37091562 PMC: 10121320. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.10031.

References
1.
Hajibabaei M, Singer G, Hebert P, Hickey D . DNA barcoding: how it complements taxonomy, molecular phylogenetics and population genetics. Trends Genet. 2007; 23(4):167-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2007.02.001. View

2.
Hebert P, Ratnasingham S, deWaard J . Barcoding animal life: cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proc Biol Sci. 2003; 270 Suppl 1:S96-9. PMC: 1698023. DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2003.0025. View

3.
Hausmann A, Segerer A, Greifenstein T, Knubben J, Moriniere J, Bozicevic V . Toward a standardized quantitative and qualitative insect monitoring scheme. Ecol Evol. 2020; 10(9):4009-4020. PMC: 7244892. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.6166. View

4.
Klunder L, van Bleijswijk J, Kleine Schaars L, van der Veer H, Luttikhuizen P, Bijleveld A . Quantification of marine benthic communities with metabarcoding. Mol Ecol Resour. 2021; 22(3):1043-1054. PMC: 9298412. DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.13536. View

5.
van Zinnicq Bergmann M, Postaire B, Gastrich K, Heithaus M, Hoopes L, Lyons K . Elucidating shark diets with DNA metabarcoding from cloacal swabs. Mol Ecol Resour. 2021; 21(4):1056-1067. DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.13315. View