Implementation options for DNA-based identification into ecological status assessment under the European Water Framework Directive

Варианты внедрения идентификации на основе ДНК в оценку экологического состояния в рамках Европейской водной рамочной директивы
Daniel Hering, Ángel Borja, J. Iwan Jones, Didier Pont, Pieter Boets, Agnès Bouchez, Kat Bruce, Stina Drakare, Bernd Hänfling, Maria Kahlert, Florian Leese, Kristian Meissner, Patricia Mergen, Yorick Reyjol, Pedro Segurado, Alfried P. Vogler, Martyn Kelly
2018-03-20

Biological Quality ElementsDNA-based identificationEuropean Water Framework Directiveenvironmental DNA (eDNA)metabarcoding
Assessment of ecological status for the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) is based on "Biological Quality Elements" (BQEs), namely phytoplankton, benthic flora, benthic invertebrates and fish. Morphological identification of these organisms is a time-consuming and expensive procedure. Here, we assess the options for complementing and, perhaps, replacing morphological identification with procedures using eDNA, metabarcoding or similar approaches. We rate the applicability of DNA-based identification for the individual BQEs and water categories (rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters) against eleven criteria, summarised under the headlines representativeness (for example suitability of current sampling methods for DNA-based identification, errors from DNA-based species detection), sensitivity (for example capability to detect sensitive taxa, unassigned reads), precision of DNA-based identification (knowledge about uncertainty), comparability with conventional approaches (for example sensitivity of metrics to differences in DNA-based identification), cost effectiveness and environmental impact. Overall, suitability of DNA-based identification is particularly high for fish, as eDNA is a well-suited sampling approach which can replace expensive and potentially harmful methods such as gill-netting, trawling or electrofishing. Furthermore, there are attempts to replace absolute by relative abundance in metric calculations. For invertebrates and phytobenthos, the main challenges include the modification of indices and completing barcode libraries. For phytoplankton, the barcode libraries are even more problematic, due to the high taxonomic diversity in plankton samples. If current assessment concepts are kept, DNA-based identification is least appropriate for macrophytes (rivers, lakes) and angiosperms/macroalgae (transitional and coastal waters), which are surveyed rather than sampled. We discuss general implications of implementing DNA-based identification into standard ecological assessment, in particular considering any adaptations to the WFD that may be required to facilitate the transition to molecular data.
1
DNA-based identification is particularly suitable for fish assessment because eDNA can replace expensive and potentially harmful gill-netting, trawling, and electrofishing.
2
For invertebrates and phytobenthos, major barriers are the need to modify assessment indices and complete barcode reference libraries.
3
Implementing DNA-based fish assessment may require replacing absolute abundance with relative abundance in ecological metric calculations.
4
Phytoplankton presents greater barcode-library challenges because plankton samples contain highly diverse taxa.
5
Under current assessment concepts, DNA-based identification is least appropriate for macrophytes and aquatic angiosperms/macroalgae because these elements are surveyed rather than sampled.

DNA-based identification of Biological Quality Elements (phytoplankton, benthic flora, benthic invertebrates, and fish) in ecological status assessment under the European Water Framework Directive

The applicability, accuracy, representativeness, comparability, cost-effectiveness, and environmental impact of eDNA, metabarcoding, and related DNA-based procedures as complements or replacements for morphological identification across water categories and Biological Quality Elements

Publication Details
Publication Date
2018-03-20
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Access Type
Author Information
Authors
Daniel Hering
Ángel Borja
J. Iwan Jones
Didier Pont
Pieter Boets
Agnès Bouchez
Kat Bruce
Stina Drakare
Bernd Hänfling
Maria Kahlert
Florian Leese
Kristian Meissner
Patricia Mergen
Yorick Reyjol
Pedro Segurado
Alfried P. Vogler
Martyn Kelly
Explore further
Open the scid.ai AI chat with a ready-made request: it will find papers on a similar topic and help build a literature review.
Find similar papers in the chat
Make a presentation
100%