Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17333-x
DC FieldValue
dc.titleEstimating and mitigating amplification bias in qualitative and quantitative arthropod metabarcoding
dc.contributor.authorKrehenwinkel, Henrik
dc.contributor.authorWolf, Madeline
dc.contributor.authorLim, Jun Ying
dc.contributor.authorRominger, Andrew J
dc.contributor.authorSimison, Warren B
dc.contributor.authorGillespie, Rosemary G
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-04T06:30:52Z
dc.date.available2022-07-04T06:30:52Z
dc.date.issued2017-12-15
dc.identifier.citationKrehenwinkel, Henrik, Wolf, Madeline, Lim, Jun Ying, Rominger, Andrew J, Simison, Warren B, Gillespie, Rosemary G (2017-12-15). Estimating and mitigating amplification bias in qualitative and quantitative arthropod metabarcoding. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS 7 (1). ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17333-x
dc.identifier.issn20452322
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/227723
dc.description.abstractAmplicon based metabarcoding promises rapid and cost-efficient analyses of species composition. However, it is disputed whether abundance estimates can be derived from metabarcoding due to taxon specific PCR amplification biases. PCR-free approaches have been suggested to mitigate this problem, but come with considerable increases in workload and cost. Here, we analyze multilocus datasets of diverse arthropod communities, to evaluate whether amplification bias can be countered by (1) targeting loci with highly degenerate primers or conserved priming sites, (2) increasing PCR template concentration, (3) reducing PCR cycle number or (4) avoiding locus specific amplification by directly sequencing genomic DNA. Amplification bias is reduced considerably by degenerate primers or targeting amplicons with conserved priming sites. Surprisingly, a reduction of PCR cycles did not have a strong effect on amplification bias. The association of taxon abundance and read count was actually less predictable with fewer cycles. Even a complete exclusion of locus specific amplification did not exclude bias. Copy number variation of the target loci may be another explanation for read abundance differences between taxa, which would affect amplicon based and PCR free methods alike. As read abundance biases are taxon specific and predictable, the application of correction factors allows abundance estimates.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherNATURE PORTFOLIO
dc.sourceElements
dc.subjectScience & Technology
dc.subjectMultidisciplinary Sciences
dc.subjectScience & Technology - Other Topics
dc.subjectMITOCHONDRIAL-DNA
dc.subjectBIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT
dc.subjectEVOLUTION
dc.subjectMARKER
dc.subjectNUMBER
dc.subjectTARGET
dc.typeArticle
dc.date.updated2022-07-04T03:10:13Z
dc.contributor.departmentBIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
dc.description.doi10.1038/s41598-017-17333-x
dc.description.sourcetitleSCIENTIFIC REPORTS
dc.description.volume7
dc.description.issue1
dc.published.statePublished
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
Estimating and mitigating amplification bias in qualitative and quantitative arthropod metabarcoding.pdfPublished version2.4 MBAdobe PDF

OPEN

PublishedView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.