Cardinale, B. J. et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486, 59–67 (2012).
WWF. Living Planet Report – 2018: Aiming higher. (WWF International, 2018).
Kelly, R. P. et al. Harnessing DNA to improve environmental management. Science 344, 1455–1456 (2014).
Bonar, S. A., Hubert, W. A. & Willis, D. W. Standard methods for sampling North American freshwater fishes (2009).
Wheeler, Q. D., Raven, P. H. & Wilson, E. O. Taxonomy: impediment or expedient?. Science (New York, NY) 303, 285 (2004).
Kelly, R. P., Port, J. A., Yamahara, K. M. & Crowder, L. B. Using environmental DNA to census marine fishes in a large mesocosm. PLoS ONE 9, e86175 (2014).
Valentini, A. et al. Next-generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol. 25, 929–942 (2016).
McDevitt, A. D. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding as an effective and rapid tool for fish monitoring in canals. J. Fish Biol. 95, 679–682 (2019).
Taberlet, P., Coissac, E., Hajibabaei, M. & Rieseberg, L. H. Environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. 21, 1789–1793 (2012).
Deiner, K. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding: transforming how we survey animal and plant communities. Mol. Ecol. 26, 5872–5895 (2017).
Nobile, A. B. et al. DNA metabarcoding of neotropical ichthyoplankton: enabling high accuracy with lower cost. Metabarcoding Metagenomics 3, e35060 (2019).
Mariac, C. et al. Metabarcoding by capture using a single COI probe (MCSP) to identify and quantify fish species in ichthyoplankton swarms. PLoS ONE 13, e0202976 (2018).
Leray, M., Meyer, C. P. & Mills, S. C. Metabarcoding dietary analysis of coral dwelling predatory fish demonstrates the minor contribution of coral mutualists to their highly partitioned, generalist diet. PeerJ 3, e1047 (2015).
Shokralla, S. et al. Massively parallel multiplex DNA sequencing for specimen identification using an IlluminaMiSeq platform. Sci. Rep. 5, 9687 (2015).
Kitano, T., Umetsu, K., Tian, W. & Osawa, M. Two universal primer sets for species identification among vertebrates. Int. J. Legal Med. 121, 423–427 (2007).
Stoeckle, M. Y., Soboleva, L. & Charlop-Powers, Z. Aquatic environmental DNA detects seasonal fish abundance and habitat preference in an urban estuary. PLoS ONE 12, e0175186 (2017).
Sales, N. G. et al. Fishing for mammals: landscape-level monitoring of terrestrial and semi-aquatic communities using eDNA from riverine systems. J. Appl. Ecol. 57, 707–716 (2020).
Bylemans, J. et al. An environmental DNA-based method for monitoring spawning activity: a case study, using the endangered Macquarie perch (Macquaria australasica). Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 646–655 (2017).
De Souza, L. S., Godwin, J. C., Renshaw, M. A. & Larson, E. Environmental DNA (eDNA) detection probability is influenced by seasonal activity of organisms. PLoS ONE 11, e0165273 (2016).
Dejean, T. et al. Improved detection of an alien invasive species through environmental DNA barcoding: the example of the American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus. J. Appl. Ecol. 49, 953–959 (2012).
Cilleros, K. et al. Unlocking biodiversity and conservation studies in high-diversity environments using environmental DNA (eDNA): a test with Guianese freshwater fishes. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 19(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12900 (2018).
Sales, N. G., Wangensteen, O. S., Carvalho, D. C. & Mariani, S. Influence of preservation methods, sample medium and sampling time on eDNA recovery in a neotropical river. Environ. DNA 1(2), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/edn3.14 (2019).
Sales, N. G. et al. Assessing the potential of environmental DNA metabarcoding for monitoring Neotropical mammals: a case study in the Amazon and Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Mamm. Rev. 50, 221–225 (2020).
Dejean, T. et al. Persistence of environmental DNA in freshwater ecosystems. PLoS ONE 6, e23398 (2011).
Gomes, L. C., Pessali, T. C., Sales, N. G., Pompeu, P. S. & Carvalho, D. C. Integrative taxonomy detects cryptic and overlooked fish species in a neotropical river basin. Genetica 143, 581–588 (2015).
Pugedo, M. L., de Andrade Neto, F. R., Pessali, T. C., Birindelli, J. L. O. & Carvalho, D. C. Integrative taxonomy supports new candidate fish species in a poorly studied neotropical region: the Jequitinhonha River Basin. Genetica 144, 341–349 (2016).
Ramirez, J. L. et al. Revealing hidden diversity of the underestimated NeotropicalIchthyofauna: DNA barcoding in the recently described genus Megaleporinus (Characiformes: Anostomidae). Front. Genet. 8, 1–11 (2017).
Carvalho, D. C. et al. Deep barcode divergence in Brazilian freshwater fishes: the case of the São Francisco River basin. Mitochondrial DNA 22, 80–86 (2011).
Collins, R. A. et al. Non-specific amplification compromises environmental DNA metabarcoding with COI. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 1985–2001 (2019).
Shaw, J. L. A. et al. Comparison of environmental DNA metabarcoding and conventional fish survey methods in a river system. Biol. Conserv. 197, 131–138 (2016).
Yamamoto, S. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding reveals local fish communities in a species-rich coastal sea. Sci. Rep. 7, 40368 (2017).
Miya, M. et al. MiFish, a set of universal PCR primers for metabarcoding environmental DNA from fishes: detection of more than 230 subtropical marine species. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2, 150088 (2015).
MacDonald, A. J. & Sarre, S. D. A framework for developing and validating taxon-specific primers for specimen identification from environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 17, 708–720 (2017).
Aljanabi, S. M. & Martinez, I. Universal and rapid salt-extraction of high quality genomic DNA for PCR-based techniques. Nucleic Acids Res. 25, 4692–4693 (1997).
Thomsen, P. F. et al. Environmental DNA from seawater samples correlate with trawl catches of subarctic deepwater fishes. PLoS ONE 11, e0165252 (2016).
Larkin, M. A. et al. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics 23, 2947–2948 (2007).
Kumar, S., Stecher, G. & Tamura, K. MEGA7: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol. 33, 1870–1874 (2016).
Kimura, M. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 16, 111–120 (1980).
Saitou, N. & Nei, M. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees’. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4, 406–425 (1987).
Felsenstein, J. Evolutionary trees from gene frequencies and quantitative characters: finding maximum likelihood estimates. Evolution (N. Y.) 35, 1229–1242 (1981).
Kearse, M. et al. Geneious Basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics 28, 1647–1649 (2012).
Proutski, V. & Holmes, E. SWAN: sliding window analysis of nucleotide sequence variability. Bioinformatics 14, 467–468 (1998).
Brown, S. D. J. et al. Spider: an R package for the analysis of species identity and evolution, with particular reference to DNA barcoding. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 12, 562–565 (2012).
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (2020).
Meusnier, I. et al. A universal DNA mini-barcode for biodiversity analysis. BMC Genomics 9, 214 (2008).
Ye, J. et al. Primer-BLAST: a tool to design target-specific primers for polymerase chain reaction. BMC Bioinform. 13, 134 (2012).
Fujisawa, T. & Barraclough, T. G. Delimiting species using single-locus data and the generalized mixed yule coalescent approach: a revised method and evaluation on simulated data sets. Syst. Biol. 62, 707–724 (2013).
Zhang, J., Kapli, P., Pavlidis, P. & Stamatakis, A. A general species delimitation method with applications to phylogenetic placements. Bioinformatics 29, 2869–2876 (2013).
Puillandre, N., Lambert, A., Brouillet, S. & Achaz, G. ABGD, Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery for primary species delimitation. Mol. Ecol. 21, 1864–1877 (2012).
Drummond, A. J. & Rambaut, A. BEAST: Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees. BMC Evol. Biol. 7, 214 (2007).
Rambaut, A., Suchard, M. A., Xie, D. & Drummond, A. J. Tracer 1.6 http://beast.bio.ed.ac.uk/tracer (2014).
Rambaut, A. & Drummond, A. J. TreeAnnotator, version 1.7. 5. Available beast. bio. ed. ac. uk/TreeAnnotator (accessed 15 April 2010) (2012).
Ward, R. D. DNA barcode divergence among species and genera of birds and fishes. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 9, 1077–1085 (2009).
Hajibabaei, M. et al. A minimalist barcode can identify a specimen whose DNA is degraded. Mol. Ecol. Notes 6, 959–964 (2006).
Yu, H.-J. & You, Z.-H. Comparison of DNA truncated barcodes and full-barcodes for species identification. in International Conference on Intelligent Computing 108–114 (Springer, 2010).
Harper, L. R. et al. Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding of pond water as a tool to survey conservation and management priority mammals. Biol. Conserv. 238, 108225 (2019).
Source: Ecology - nature.com
