Comparative performance of the 16S rRNA gene in DNA barcoding of amphibians

BackgroundIdentifying species of organisms by short sequences of DNA has been in the center of ongoing discussions under the terms DNA barcoding or DNA taxonomy. A C-terminal fragment of the mitochondrial gene for cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) has been proposed as universal marker for this purpose among animals.ResultsHerein we present experimental evidence that the mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene fulfills the requirements for a universal DNA barcoding marker in amphibians. In terms of universality of priming sites and identification of major vertebrate clades the studied 16S fragment is superior to COI. Amplification success was 100% for 16S in a subset of fresh and well-preserved samples of Madagascan frogs, while various combination of COI primers had lower success rates.COI priming sites showed high variability among amphibians both at the level of groups and closely related species, whereas 16S priming sites were highly conserved among vertebrates. Interspecific pairwise 16S divergences in a test group of Madagascan frogs were at a level suitable for assignment of larval stages to species (1–17%), with low degrees of pairwise haplotype divergence within populations (0–1%).ConclusionWe strongly advocate the use of 16S rRNA as standard DNA barcoding marker for vertebrates to complement COI, especially if samples a priori could belong to various phylogenetically distant taxa and false negatives would constitute a major problem.

[1]  P. Hebert,et al.  Identification of Birds through DNA Barcodes , 2004, PLoS biology.

[2]  M. Hasegawa,et al.  Complete nucleotide sequence and gene rearrangement of the mitochondrial genome of the Japanese pond frog Rana nigromaculata. , 2001, Genes & genetic systems.

[3]  P. Hebert,et al.  Barcoding animal life: cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[4]  D. J. Funk,et al.  Species-Level Paraphyly and Polyphyly: Frequency, Causes, and Consequences, with Insights from Animal Mitochondrial DNA , 2003 .

[5]  C. Cicero,et al.  Open access, freely available online Correspondence DNA Barcoding: Promise and Pitfalls , 2022 .

[6]  M. Vences,et al.  Montane Tadpoles in Madagascar: Molecular Identification and Description of the Larval Stages of Mantidactylus elegans, Mantidactylus madecassus, and Boophis laurenti from the Andringitra Massif , 2005, Copeia.

[7]  Mark Blaxter,et al.  Molecular barcodes for soil nematode identification , 2002, Molecular ecology.

[8]  A. Meyer,et al.  Response to Comment on "Origin of the Superflock of Cichlid Fishes from Lake Victoria, East Africa" , 2004, Science.

[9]  H Martin,et al.  Now is the time. , 1966, The Nova Scotia medical bulletin.

[10]  A. Guiller,et al.  Extreme divergence of mitochondrial DNA within species of pulmonate land snails , 1996, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[11]  T. Kocher,et al.  Phylogeny of a rapidly evolving clade: the cichlid fishes of Lake Malawi, East Africa. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  D. Swofford PAUP*: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), Version 4.0b10 , 2002 .

[13]  D. Janzen,et al.  Ten species in one: DNA barcoding reveals cryptic species in the neotropical skipper butterfly Astraptes fulgerator. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  M. Blaxter The promise of a DNA taxonomy. , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[15]  M. Milinkovitch,et al.  Convergent adaptive radiations in Madagascan and Asian ranid frogs reveal covariation between larval and adult traits. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  T. Papenfuss,et al.  Two novel gene orders and the role of light-strand replication in rearrangement of the vertebrate mitochondrial genome. , 1997, Molecular biology and evolution.

[17]  Xavier Messeguer,et al.  DnaSP, DNA polymorphism analyses by the coalescent and other methods , 2003, Bioinform..

[18]  E. Myers,et al.  Basic local alignment search tool. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[19]  Andrew P. Martin,et al.  THE SIMPLE FOOL’S GUIDE TO PCR , 2004 .

[20]  O. White,et al.  Environmental Genome Shotgun Sequencing of the Sargasso Sea , 2004, Science.

[21]  Carsten Wiuf,et al.  Diverse Plant and Animal Genetic Records from Holocene and Pleistocene Sediments , 2003, Science.

[22]  J. Handelsman,et al.  Cloning the Soil Metagenome: a Strategy for Accessing the Genetic and Functional Diversity of Uncultured Microorganisms , 2000, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[23]  D. Tautz,et al.  A plea for DNA taxonomy , 2003 .

[24]  Yangrae Cho,et al.  Dynamic evolution of plant mitochondrial genomes: mobile genes and introns and highly variable mutation rates. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  A. Meyer,et al.  New evidence for parallel evolution of colour patterns in Malagasy poison frogs (Mantella) , 2004, Molecular ecology.

[26]  A. Seitz,et al.  A test for correct species declaration of frog legs imports from Indonesia into the European Union , 2000, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[27]  E. Wilson Taxonomy as a fundamental discipline. , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[28]  Jeremy R. deWaard,et al.  Biological identifications through DNA barcodes , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[29]  A. Wilson,et al.  Two types of molecular evolution , 1974 .

[30]  A. Wilson,et al.  Two types of molecular evolution. Evidence from studies of interspecific hybridization. , 1974, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  A. Meyer,et al.  Multiple overseas dispersal in amphibians , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[32]  C. A. Machado,et al.  The causes of phylogenetic conflict in a classic Drosophila species group , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.