Environmental DNA captured on the fish skin mucus – a potential bias to molecular diet analyses

Molecular diet analyses from faeces appear to be an ideal alternative to traditional feeding ecology studies. Nevertheless, this method can carry a risk of contamination from the environment or from body surface of the fish itself. To tackle the contamination problem, an experiment was performed with the main aim to identify whether foreign DNA is present or absent on the fish skin mucus, and if so, the second aim was to find out if this environmental DNA (eDNA) can be removed by repeated wiping of the skin mucus. Specimens of fish were exposed to eDNA and then their fish skin mucus was wiped with two consecutive smears (using a forensic swab) that were subjected to molecular analysis. The results demonstrate that eDNA from other organisms can be captured and persist on the fish skin mucus, posing a potential risk of contamination of faeces samples. Repeated wiping of mucus reduces or eliminates foreign DNA. This study provides new insights that can contribute to the development of the molecular methods, reducing the bias and increasing the accuracy of the diet spectrum analyses.

[1]  I. Domaizon,et al.  Fish eDNA metabarcoding from aquatic biofilm samples: Methodological aspects , 2021, Molecular ecology resources.

[2]  Arne J. Beermann,et al.  Improved freshwater macroinvertebrate detection from environmental DNA through minimized nontarget amplification , 2020, ARPHA Conference Abstracts.

[3]  S. Hadi,et al.  Profiling and Role of Bioactive Molecules from Puntius sophore (Freshwater/Brackish Fish) Skin Mucus with Its Potent Antibacterial, Antiadhesion, and Antibiofilm Activities , 2020, Biomolecules.

[4]  I. Pyrri,et al.  Fungal contaminants of indoor air in the National Library of Greece , 2020, Aerobiologia.

[5]  L. Kago,et al.  Assessment of Fungal Contamination in Fish Feed from the Lake Victoria Basin, Uganda , 2020, Toxins.

[6]  A. Bhatnagar,et al.  Evaluation of the antibacterial activity of skin mucus of three carp species , 2019, International Aquatic Research.

[7]  Rui Zhang,et al.  Analysis of enzyme activity, antibacterial activity, antiparasitic activity and physico‐chemical stability of skin mucus derived from Amphiprion clarkii , 2019, Fish & shellfish immunology.

[8]  M. A. Senar,et al.  The choice of universal primers and the characteristics of the species mixture determine when DNA metabarcoding can be quantitative , 2018, Molecular ecology.

[9]  Kristian Meissner,et al.  Implementation options for DNA-based identification into ecological status assessment under the European Water Framework Directive. , 2018, Water research.

[10]  Sudhir Kumar,et al.  MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across Computing Platforms. , 2018, Molecular biology and evolution.

[11]  F. Altermatt,et al.  Shedding light on eDNA: neither natural levels of UV radiation nor the presence of a filter feeder affect eDNA-based detection of aquatic organisms , 2018, PloS one.

[12]  M. Traugott,et al.  Identifying plant DNA in the sponging–feeding insect pest Drosophila suzukii , 2018, Journal of Pest Science.

[13]  N. Gunde-Cimerman,et al.  Fungal Contaminants in Drinking Water Regulation? A Tale of Ecology, Exposure, Purification and Clinical Relevance , 2017, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

[14]  F. Leese,et al.  Validation and Development of COI Metabarcoding Primers for Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment , 2017, Front. Environ. Sci..

[15]  Carol A. Stepien,et al.  Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding assays to detect invasive invertebrate species in the Great Lakes , 2017, PloS one.

[16]  A. Iribar,et al.  Application of DNA metabarcoding on faeces to identify European catfish Silurus glanis diet. , 2017, Journal of fish biology.

[17]  M. Traugott,et al.  Comparing three types of dietary samples for prey DNA decay in an insect generalist predator , 2017, bioRxiv.

[18]  F. Leese,et al.  Widely distributed and regionally isolated! Drivers of genetic structure in Gammarus fossarum in a human-impacted landscape , 2016, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[19]  Matthew A. Barnes,et al.  The ecology of environmental DNA and implications for conservation genetics , 2016, Conservation Genetics.

[20]  G. Joo,et al.  Discovering hidden biodiversity: the use of complementary monitoring of fish diet based on DNA barcoding in freshwater ecosystems , 2015, Ecology and evolution.

[21]  Bettina Thalinger,et al.  Maximizing dietary information retrievable from carcasses of Great Cormorants Phalacrocorax carbo using a combined morphological and molecular analytical approach , 2015, The Ibis.

[22]  J. Piñol,et al.  Universal and blocking primer mismatches limit the use of high‐throughput DNA sequencing for the quantitative metabarcoding of arthropods , 2015, Molecular ecology resources.

[23]  Bettina Thalinger,et al.  Molecular prey identification in Central European piscivores , 2015, Molecular ecology resources.

[24]  Robert S. Arkle,et al.  Factors influencing detection of eDNA from a stream‐dwelling amphibian , 2014, Molecular ecology resources.

[25]  U. Jondelius,et al.  Problematic barcoding in flatworms: A case-study on monogeneans and rhabdocoels (Platyhelminthes) , 2013, ZooKeys.

[26]  Kwang-Seuk Jeong,et al.  Application of DNA barcoding for identification of freshwater carnivorous fish diets: Is number of prey items dependent on size class for Micropterus salmoides? , 2013, Ecology and evolution.

[27]  J. Geller,et al.  Redesign of PCR primers for mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I for marine invertebrates and application in all‐taxa biotic surveys , 2013, Molecular ecology resources.

[28]  B. Deagle,et al.  Quantifying sequence proportions in a DNA‐based diet study using Ion Torrent amplicon sequencing: which counts count? , 2013, Molecular ecology resources.

[29]  Cheng-Hong Yang,et al.  Specific primer design for the polymerase chain reaction , 2013, Biotechnology Letters.

[30]  V. Ranwez,et al.  A new versatile primer set targeting a short fragment of the mitochondrial COI region for metabarcoding metazoan diversity: application for characterizing coral reef fish gut contents , 2013, Frontiers in Zoology.

[31]  M. Payton,et al.  Removing external DNA contamination from arthropod predators destined for molecular gut‐content analysis , 2012, Molecular ecology resources.

[32]  M. Traugott,et al.  Optimizing methods for PCR-based analysis of predation , 2011, Molecular ecology resources.

[33]  S. Ludsin,et al.  Utilization of stomach content DNA to determine diet diversity in piscivorous fishes. , 2011, Journal of fish biology.

[34]  Jean-François Martin,et al.  A PCR‐based method for diet analysis in freshwater organisms using 18S rDNA barcoding on faeces , 2010, Molecular Ecology Resources.

[35]  Wijnand Eduard,et al.  Fungal spores: A critical review of the toxicological and epidemiological evidence as a basis for occupational exposure limit setting , 2009, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[36]  D. Marcogliese,et al.  Development of primers for the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I gene in digenetic trematodes (Platyhelminthes) illustrates the challenge of barcoding parasitic helminths , 2009, Molecular ecology resources.

[37]  V. Allain,et al.  DNA identification of gut contents of large pelagic fishes , 2005 .

[38]  Jain-Shing Wu,et al.  Primer design using genetic algorithm , 2004, Bioinform..

[39]  J. Bøgwald,et al.  Influence of artificial wound and non-intact mucus layer on mortality of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salarL.) following a bath challenge withVibrio anguillarumandAeromonas salmonicida , 1997 .

[40]  P. Sunnucks,et al.  Numerous transposed sequences of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I-II in aphids of the genus Sitobion (Hemiptera: Aphididae). , 1996, Molecular biology and evolution.

[41]  C. Goldberg,et al.  Special Issue Article: Environmental DNA Quantifying effects of UV-B, temperature, and pH on eDNA degradation in aquatic microcosms , 2014 .

[42]  J. B. Alexander,et al.  Noncellular nonspecific defence mechanisms of fish , 1992 .