IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0231718.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the efficiency of open and enclosed filtration systems in environmental DNA quantification for fish and jellyfish

Author

Listed:
  • Sayaka Takahashi
  • Masayuki K Sakata
  • Toshifumi Minamoto
  • Reiji Masuda

Abstract

Water sampling and filtration of environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis have been performed by several different methods, and each method may yield a different species composition or eDNA concentration. Here, we investigated the eDNA of seawater samples directly collected by SCUBA to compare two widely used filtration methods: open filtration with a glass filter (GF/F) and enclosed filtration (Sterivex). We referred to biomass based on visual observation data collected simultaneously to clarify the difference between organism groups. Water samples were collected at two points in the Sea of Japan in May, September and December 2018. The respective samples were filtered through GF/F and Sterivex for eDNA extraction. We quantified the eDNA concentration of five fish and two cnidarian species by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) using species-specific primers/probe sets. A strong correlation of eDNA concentration was obtained between GF/F and Sterivex; the intercepts and slopes of the linear regression lines were slightly different in fish and jellyfish. The amount of eDNA detected using the GF/F filtration method was higher than that detected using Sterivex when the eDNA concentration was high; the opposite trend was observed when the eDNA concentration was relatively low. The concentration of eDNA correlated with visually estimated biomass; eDNA concentration per biomass in jellyfish was approximately 700 times greater than that in fish. We conclude that GF/F provides an advantage in collecting a large amount of eDNA, whereas Sterivex offers superior eDNA sensitivity. Both filtration methods are effective in estimating the spatiotemporal biomass size of target marine species.

Suggested Citation

  • Sayaka Takahashi & Masayuki K Sakata & Toshifumi Minamoto & Reiji Masuda, 2020. "Comparing the efficiency of open and enclosed filtration systems in environmental DNA quantification for fish and jellyfish," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-23, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231718
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231718
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231718
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231718&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0231718?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231718. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.