Ecological assessment of estuarine sediments by pyrosequencing eukaryotic ribosomal DNA

Biodiversity assessment underpins our understanding of ecosystems and determines environmental management decisions on resource use and conservation priorities. Recently, a new discipline – environmental or ecological genomics (ecogenomics) – has emerged from major advances in sequencing technologies, such as pyrosequencing (a technique based on the detection of pyrophosphate during nucleotide incorporation), and enabled extraordinary progress in the way biodiversity can be assessed. Since 2008, numerous high-impact microbial metagenomic sequencing studies, which have relied on both classical and next-generation sequencing, have been published. As a result, many previously unrecognized taxa and biota have been identified, but none of these studies explored eukaryote diversity. Here, we illustrate the power of applying next-generation pyrosequencing to identify and enumerate eukaryote species assemblages in the context of assessing the impacts of human activity on ecosystems.

[1]  D. Tautz,et al.  Reverse taxonomy: an approach towards determining the diversity of meiobenthic organisms based on ribosomal RNA signature sequences , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[2]  F. Sanger,et al.  DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. , 1977, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  L. Eaton Development and validation of biocriteria using benthic macroinvertebrates for North Carolina estuarine waters. , 2001, Marine pollution bulletin.

[4]  I-Min A. Chen,et al.  The Genomes On Line Database (GOLD) in 2007: status of genomic and metagenomic projects and their associated metadata , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[5]  R. Oliver,et al.  Carbon source accounting for fish using combined DNA and stable isotope analyses in a regulated lowland river weir pool , 2010, Molecular ecology.

[6]  Taylor H. Ricketts,et al.  The Convention on Biological Diversity's 2010 Target , 2005, Science.

[7]  E. Johnston,et al.  Contaminants reduce the richness and evenness of marine communities: a review and meta-analysis. , 2009, Environmental pollution.

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

[9]  Denise Bellan-Santini Relationship between populations of amphipods and pollution , 1980 .

[10]  A. Omilian,et al.  Rates of Recombination in the Ribosomal DNA of Apomictically Propagated Daphnia obtusa Lines , 2007, Genetics.

[11]  P. Holland,et al.  Evolution of 28S Ribosomal DNA in Chaetognaths: Duplicate Genes and Molecular Phylogeny , 1997, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[12]  S. Fonda-Umani,et al.  Effects of industrial and urban pollution on the benthic macrofauna in the Bay of Muggia (industrial port of Trieste, Italy). , 2004, The Science of the total environment.

[13]  V. Henrich,et al.  Developing SSU rDNA metagenomic profiles of aquatic microbial communities for environmental assessments. , 2008 .

[14]  A. D. Kennedy,et al.  Biological Indicators of Marine Environmental Health: Meiofauna – A Neglected Benthic Component? , 1999 .

[15]  B. C. Coull,et al.  Pollution and meiofauna - field, laboratory, and mesocosm studies , 1992 .

[16]  Matthew E Hudson,et al.  Sequencing breakthroughs for genomic ecology and evolutionary biology , 2008, Molecular ecology resources.

[17]  Gary S. Lawrence,et al.  Weight-of-Evidence Issues and Frameworks for Sediment Quality (And Other) Assessments , 2002 .

[18]  M. Chapman,et al.  Evidence necessary for taxa to be reliable indicators of environmental conditions or impacts. , 2009, Marine pollution bulletin.

[19]  Rick L. Stevens,et al.  Functional metagenomic profiling of nine biomes , 2008, Nature.