留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码
蒋佩文, 李敏, 张帅, 陈作志, 徐姗楠. 基于环境DNA宏条码和底拖网的珠江河口鱼类多样性[J]. 水生生物学报, 2022, 46(11): 1701-1711. DOI: 10.7541/2022.2021.0265
引用本文: 蒋佩文, 李敏, 张帅, 陈作志, 徐姗楠. 基于环境DNA宏条码和底拖网的珠江河口鱼类多样性[J]. 水生生物学报, 2022, 46(11): 1701-1711. DOI: 10.7541/2022.2021.0265
JIANG Pei-Wen, LI Min, ZHANG Shuai, CHEN Zuo-Zhi, XU Shan-Nan. INVESTIGATING THE FISH DIVERSITY IN PEARL RIVER ESTUARY BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL DNA MATEBARCODING AND BOTTOM TRAWLING[J]. ACTA HYDROBIOLOGICA SINICA, 2022, 46(11): 1701-1711. DOI: 10.7541/2022.2021.0265
Citation: JIANG Pei-Wen, LI Min, ZHANG Shuai, CHEN Zuo-Zhi, XU Shan-Nan. INVESTIGATING THE FISH DIVERSITY IN PEARL RIVER ESTUARY BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL DNA MATEBARCODING AND BOTTOM TRAWLING[J]. ACTA HYDROBIOLOGICA SINICA, 2022, 46(11): 1701-1711. DOI: 10.7541/2022.2021.0265

基于环境DNA宏条码和底拖网的珠江河口鱼类多样性

INVESTIGATING THE FISH DIVERSITY IN PEARL RIVER ESTUARY BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL DNA MATEBARCODING AND BOTTOM TRAWLING

  • 摘要: 文章采用环境DNA宏条码和底拖网对珠江河口鱼类多样性进行了研究, 并对两种方法进行了比较。利用环境DNA宏条码检测到了175种鱼类, 而利用底拖网采集到了47种鱼类, 结合两种方法共检测出179种鱼类, 隶属于15 目63科128属。其中两种方法共同识别了鱼类43种, 占总检测物种的24.02%, 基于底拖网的调查未能收集到基于环境DNA宏条码检测到的大多数物种。根据Shannon指数和Simpson指数显示, DNA宏条码所检测珠江河口鱼类群落α多样性显著高于底拖网方法(P<0.05)。两种方法的PCoA结果均显示珠江河口鱼类群落存在空间结构, 基于环境DNA宏条码的分析显示空间重叠更多。两种方法基于冗余分析均显示溶解氧和盐度是影响鱼类群落结构的主要环境因子。研究表明, 环境DNA 宏条形码是一种环保且可靠的评估方法, 将其搭载到现有调查可以更好地了解河口鱼类多样性。

     

    Abstract: Fish biodiversity in the Pearl River Estuary is declining due to excessive fishing intensity and marine development. Fish biodiversity assessment is an important part of ecosystem protection and management. However, traditional fish biodiversity assessment tools often have limitations, and the new environmental DNA (eDNA) matebarcoding is a potential biodiversity assessment tool, which can monitor the whole ecosystem quickly and comprehensively. In this study, fish biodiversity was studied at 10 sites in the Pearl River Estuary in March 2020 through a standardized process of eDNA metabarcoding analysis, including water collection, water filtration, eDNA extraction, genetic marker amplification, sequencing and bioinformatic analyses. In addition, bottom trawling method was used for sampling at 9 stations at the same time. We compared the detection results of the two methods. 175 species of fish were detected by eDNA matebarcoding, and 47 species were collected by bottom trawling. Combined with the two methods, 179 species of fish were detected, belonging to 15 orders, 63 families and 128 genera. The two methods jointly identified 43 species of fish, accounting for 24.02% of the total detected species, the survey based on bottom trawling failed to collect most species detected based on eDNA matebarcoding. According to shannon index and Simpson index, the Alpha diversity of fish community detected by eDNA matebarcoding in the Pearl River Estuary was significantly higher than that of bottom trawling (P<0.05). The PCoA results of the two methods provided insight on the spatial structure of fish community in Pearl River Estuary, in which the analysis based on eDNA metabarcoding showed that there is more spatial overlap. Both methods based on redundancy analysis (RDA) showed that dissolved oxygen and salinity are the main environmental factors affecting fish community structure. This study shows that the eDNA metabarcoding is an environmentally friendly and reliable assessment method, and it can be better understood in the estuary fish diversity by carrying it into the existing survey.

     

/

返回文章
返回