Sediment eDNA Metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction

Routine biological monitoring of the areas affected by offshore oil drilling and extraction is critical for ensuring proper environmental management. In addition to sufficient knowledge of the ecosystem affected, formalised e.g. as biotic indices of indicator species, adequate temporal and spatial r...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:ARPHA Conference Abstracts
Main Authors: Lanzén,Anders, Thomassen Hestetun,Jon, Bagi,Andrea, Dahlgren,Thomas
Format: Conference Object
Language:English
Published: Pensoft Publishers 2021
Subjects:
18S
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.3897/aca.4.e65034
https://aca.pensoft.net/article/65034/
id ftpensoft:10.3897/aca.4.e65034
record_format openpolar
spelling ftpensoft:10.3897/aca.4.e65034 2023-05-15T15:39:13+02:00 Sediment eDNA Metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction Lanzén,Anders Thomassen Hestetun,Jon Bagi,Andrea Dahlgren,Thomas 2021 text/html https://doi.org/10.3897/aca.4.e65034 https://aca.pensoft.net/article/65034/ en eng Pensoft Publishers info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/eissn/2603-3925 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess ARPHA Conference Abstracts 4: e65034 monitoring microbenthos sediment eDNA de novo biotic index oil extraction hydrocarbons metabarcoding 18S Conference Abstract 2021 ftpensoft https://doi.org/10.3897/aca.4.e65034 2022-03-01T12:46:32Z Routine biological monitoring of the areas affected by offshore oil drilling and extraction is critical for ensuring proper environmental management. In addition to sufficient knowledge of the ecosystem affected, formalised e.g. as biotic indices of indicator species, adequate temporal and spatial resolution is also required, to provide accurate information. As already demonstrated in several types of environments, environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding offers an attractive alternative to current morphology-based assessments, including for impacts of oil extraction or spills.We have recently studied the influence of different experimental strategies on the accuracy of marine sediment metabarcoding, suggesting minimum criteria for technical and spatial replication (Hestetun et al. 2020). Here, we aim to evaluate the predictive power of this strategy, through agreement with assessments based on physicochemical measurements and current bioindicators. To this end, we targeted the metazoan, and total eukaryotic benthic communities, using COI and 18S V1-V2 markers, respectively. Sampled sites ranged from high to low impacts. The studied areas were located near active production installations and reference sites on the Norwegian continental shelf, in the North Sea and Barents Sea. As a proxy for accumulated impact, we developed a simple physicochemical pressure index (PI) based on total hydrocarbons, PAH16, barium and copper, all of which agreed well with impact reported from recent routine monitoring. Alpha diversity of both molecular datasets, as well as of morphology data, correlated strongly with this PI. However, the correlation was stronger yet with the macroinvertebrate-based Norwegian Sensitivity Index (NSI) derived from COI metabarcoding data, which also agreed well with NSI values derived from morphology-based monitoring. We also identified a set of bioindicator taxa from each of the two metabarcoding datasets, used to develop two novel metabarcoding-based biotic indeces. Using cross-validation, we demonstrated that predictions based on these indeces agreed well with PI. Predictive performance was better, and similar to NSI, for the COI-based index, but also high for the 18S-based version. In conclusion, this study demonstrates how de novo biotic indices can be developed, that perform comparably to existing biotic indices. We are confident that, using a larger set of samples, performance can be improved beyond that of current monitoring practices. Thanks to the reduced costs of eDNA analysis in comparison to morphological identifiation, this would also pave the way for improved spatial and temporal resolution employed in routine environmental monitoring. In doing so, it can also provide valuable raw data for improving our understanding of benthic ecology, biodiversity and its sensitivity to anthropogenic pressures. Conference Object Barents Sea Pensoft Publishers Barents Sea ARPHA Conference Abstracts 4
institution Open Polar
collection Pensoft Publishers
op_collection_id ftpensoft
language English
topic monitoring
microbenthos
sediment
eDNA
de novo biotic index
oil extraction
hydrocarbons
metabarcoding
18S
spellingShingle monitoring
microbenthos
sediment
eDNA
de novo biotic index
oil extraction
hydrocarbons
metabarcoding
18S
Lanzén,Anders
Thomassen Hestetun,Jon
Bagi,Andrea
Dahlgren,Thomas
Sediment eDNA Metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction
topic_facet monitoring
microbenthos
sediment
eDNA
de novo biotic index
oil extraction
hydrocarbons
metabarcoding
18S
description Routine biological monitoring of the areas affected by offshore oil drilling and extraction is critical for ensuring proper environmental management. In addition to sufficient knowledge of the ecosystem affected, formalised e.g. as biotic indices of indicator species, adequate temporal and spatial resolution is also required, to provide accurate information. As already demonstrated in several types of environments, environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding offers an attractive alternative to current morphology-based assessments, including for impacts of oil extraction or spills.We have recently studied the influence of different experimental strategies on the accuracy of marine sediment metabarcoding, suggesting minimum criteria for technical and spatial replication (Hestetun et al. 2020). Here, we aim to evaluate the predictive power of this strategy, through agreement with assessments based on physicochemical measurements and current bioindicators. To this end, we targeted the metazoan, and total eukaryotic benthic communities, using COI and 18S V1-V2 markers, respectively. Sampled sites ranged from high to low impacts. The studied areas were located near active production installations and reference sites on the Norwegian continental shelf, in the North Sea and Barents Sea. As a proxy for accumulated impact, we developed a simple physicochemical pressure index (PI) based on total hydrocarbons, PAH16, barium and copper, all of which agreed well with impact reported from recent routine monitoring. Alpha diversity of both molecular datasets, as well as of morphology data, correlated strongly with this PI. However, the correlation was stronger yet with the macroinvertebrate-based Norwegian Sensitivity Index (NSI) derived from COI metabarcoding data, which also agreed well with NSI values derived from morphology-based monitoring. We also identified a set of bioindicator taxa from each of the two metabarcoding datasets, used to develop two novel metabarcoding-based biotic indeces. Using cross-validation, we demonstrated that predictions based on these indeces agreed well with PI. Predictive performance was better, and similar to NSI, for the COI-based index, but also high for the 18S-based version. In conclusion, this study demonstrates how de novo biotic indices can be developed, that perform comparably to existing biotic indices. We are confident that, using a larger set of samples, performance can be improved beyond that of current monitoring practices. Thanks to the reduced costs of eDNA analysis in comparison to morphological identifiation, this would also pave the way for improved spatial and temporal resolution employed in routine environmental monitoring. In doing so, it can also provide valuable raw data for improving our understanding of benthic ecology, biodiversity and its sensitivity to anthropogenic pressures.
format Conference Object
author Lanzén,Anders
Thomassen Hestetun,Jon
Bagi,Andrea
Dahlgren,Thomas
author_facet Lanzén,Anders
Thomassen Hestetun,Jon
Bagi,Andrea
Dahlgren,Thomas
author_sort Lanzén,Anders
title Sediment eDNA Metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction
title_short Sediment eDNA Metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction
title_full Sediment eDNA Metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction
title_fullStr Sediment eDNA Metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction
title_full_unstemmed Sediment eDNA Metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction
title_sort sediment edna metabarcoding for monitoring impacts from offshore oil extraction
publisher Pensoft Publishers
publishDate 2021
url https://doi.org/10.3897/aca.4.e65034
https://aca.pensoft.net/article/65034/
geographic Barents Sea
geographic_facet Barents Sea
genre Barents Sea
genre_facet Barents Sea
op_source ARPHA Conference Abstracts 4: e65034
op_relation info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/eissn/2603-3925
op_rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
op_doi https://doi.org/10.3897/aca.4.e65034
container_title ARPHA Conference Abstracts
container_volume 4
_version_ 1766370697039314944