Optimizing DNA extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (Eubalaena australis)

Faecal metabarcoding is widely used for mammalian diet analysis. However, most extraction protocols are designed to use high molecular weight genomic DNA, making short sequences of digested DNA challenging to extract. Here, we compared a phosphate buffer DNA extraction method along with two commerci...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Parikh, Aashi, O'Rorke, Richard, Carroll, Emma, Vermeulen, Els, Harcourt, Robert, Chariton, Anthony
Format: Other/Unknown Material
Language:unknown
Published: Zenodo 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13865233
_version_ 1821862298261651456
author Parikh, Aashi
O'Rorke, Richard
Carroll, Emma
Vermeulen, Els
Harcourt, Robert
Chariton, Anthony
author_facet Parikh, Aashi
O'Rorke, Richard
Carroll, Emma
Vermeulen, Els
Harcourt, Robert
Chariton, Anthony
author_sort Parikh, Aashi
collection Zenodo
description Faecal metabarcoding is widely used for mammalian diet analysis. However, most extraction protocols are designed to use high molecular weight genomic DNA, making short sequences of digested DNA challenging to extract. Here, we compared a phosphate buffer DNA extraction method along with two commercial extraction kits (the QIAamp Fast DNA Stool Mini Kit and the PowerSoil kit) with the following variations: 1) different durations of incubation in a phosphate buffer (1 hour and 24 hours), 2) processing of both pellet and supernatant from phosphate buffer incubation, and 3) two different concentrations of DNA binding buffer to examine prey DNA in southern right whale ( Eubalaena australis, SRW) faecal matter. We found that the choice of extraction protocol influenced richness, diversity, and composition of eukaryotes (18S rDNA) and crustaceans (Crust16S mtDNA) detected in SRW faecal samples. The PowerSoil protocol performed well for both markers, delivering the highest target richness for 18S rDNA and highest diversity for Crust16S mtDNA, while the pellet of the phosphate buffer yielded the highest richness for Crust16S mtDNA. The phosphate buffer supernatant protocols produced the lowest results for richness and diversity. Taxonomic composition in the supernatant alone was affected by the duration of incubation and the concentration of binding buffer and was also distinct from the corresponding pellet. Our results reinforce the importance of having clear targets prior to selecting a method for faecal metabarcoding, as the specific aims (e.g. identifying richness versus diversity) will inform the choice of extraction protocol. Southern right whale faecal samples were collected opportunistically over decades of research. Faecal samples underwent DNA extraction using three different methods (phosphate buffer extraction, PowerSoil kit and QIAamp FAST DNA Stool Mini Kit) with modifications in each leading to 12 unique protocols. The modifications included: incubating samples for 1 hr and 24 hrs in a phosphate buffer, ...
format Other/Unknown Material
genre baleen whale
Southern Right Whale
genre_facet baleen whale
Southern Right Whale
id ftzenodo:oai:zenodo.org:13865233
institution Open Polar
language unknown
op_collection_id ftzenodo
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1386523310.5061/dryad.9s4mw6mrx10.5281/zenodo.13865232
op_relation https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.9s4mw6mrx
https://zenodo.org/communities/dryad
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13865232
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13865233
oai:zenodo.org:13865233
op_rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
MIT License
https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
publishDate 2024
publisher Zenodo
record_format openpolar
spelling ftzenodo:oai:zenodo.org:13865233 2025-01-16T21:09:33+00:00 Optimizing DNA extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (Eubalaena australis) Parikh, Aashi O'Rorke, Richard Carroll, Emma Vermeulen, Els Harcourt, Robert Chariton, Anthony 2024-10-17 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13865233 unknown Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.9s4mw6mrx https://zenodo.org/communities/dryad https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13865232 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13865233 oai:zenodo.org:13865233 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess MIT License https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT Faecal metabarcoding southern right whale phosphate buffer extraction PowerSoil QIAamp Fast DNA Stool Mini Kit info:eu-repo/semantics/other 2024 ftzenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1386523310.5061/dryad.9s4mw6mrx10.5281/zenodo.13865232 2024-12-05T14:38:07Z Faecal metabarcoding is widely used for mammalian diet analysis. However, most extraction protocols are designed to use high molecular weight genomic DNA, making short sequences of digested DNA challenging to extract. Here, we compared a phosphate buffer DNA extraction method along with two commercial extraction kits (the QIAamp Fast DNA Stool Mini Kit and the PowerSoil kit) with the following variations: 1) different durations of incubation in a phosphate buffer (1 hour and 24 hours), 2) processing of both pellet and supernatant from phosphate buffer incubation, and 3) two different concentrations of DNA binding buffer to examine prey DNA in southern right whale ( Eubalaena australis, SRW) faecal matter. We found that the choice of extraction protocol influenced richness, diversity, and composition of eukaryotes (18S rDNA) and crustaceans (Crust16S mtDNA) detected in SRW faecal samples. The PowerSoil protocol performed well for both markers, delivering the highest target richness for 18S rDNA and highest diversity for Crust16S mtDNA, while the pellet of the phosphate buffer yielded the highest richness for Crust16S mtDNA. The phosphate buffer supernatant protocols produced the lowest results for richness and diversity. Taxonomic composition in the supernatant alone was affected by the duration of incubation and the concentration of binding buffer and was also distinct from the corresponding pellet. Our results reinforce the importance of having clear targets prior to selecting a method for faecal metabarcoding, as the specific aims (e.g. identifying richness versus diversity) will inform the choice of extraction protocol. Southern right whale faecal samples were collected opportunistically over decades of research. Faecal samples underwent DNA extraction using three different methods (phosphate buffer extraction, PowerSoil kit and QIAamp FAST DNA Stool Mini Kit) with modifications in each leading to 12 unique protocols. The modifications included: incubating samples for 1 hr and 24 hrs in a phosphate buffer, ... Other/Unknown Material baleen whale Southern Right Whale Zenodo
spellingShingle Faecal metabarcoding
southern right whale
phosphate buffer extraction
PowerSoil
QIAamp Fast DNA Stool Mini Kit
Parikh, Aashi
O'Rorke, Richard
Carroll, Emma
Vermeulen, Els
Harcourt, Robert
Chariton, Anthony
Optimizing DNA extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (Eubalaena australis)
title Optimizing DNA extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (Eubalaena australis)
title_full Optimizing DNA extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (Eubalaena australis)
title_fullStr Optimizing DNA extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (Eubalaena australis)
title_full_unstemmed Optimizing DNA extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (Eubalaena australis)
title_short Optimizing DNA extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (Eubalaena australis)
title_sort optimizing dna extraction protocols for the diet analysis of a baleen whale (eubalaena australis)
topic Faecal metabarcoding
southern right whale
phosphate buffer extraction
PowerSoil
QIAamp Fast DNA Stool Mini Kit
topic_facet Faecal metabarcoding
southern right whale
phosphate buffer extraction
PowerSoil
QIAamp Fast DNA Stool Mini Kit
url https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13865233