Design and applicability of DNA arrays and DNA barcodes in biodiversity monitoring

BackgroundThe rapid and accurate identification of species is a critical component of large-scale biodiversity monitoring programs. DNA arrays (micro and macro) and DNA barcodes are two molecular approaches that have recently garnered much attention. Here, we compare these two platforms for identification of an important group, the mammals.ResultsOur analyses, based on the two commonly used mitochondrial genes cytochrome c oxidase I (the standard DNA barcode for animal species) and cytochrome b (a common species-level marker), suggest that both arrays and barcodes are capable of discriminating mammalian species with high accuracy. We used three different datasets of mammalian species, comprising different sampling strategies. For DNA arrays we designed three probes for each species to address intraspecific variation. As for DNA barcoding, our analyses show that both cytochrome c oxidase I and cytochrome b genes, and even smaller fragments of them (mini-barcodes) can successfully discriminate species in a wide variety of specimens.ConclusionThis study showed that DNA arrays and DNA barcodes are valuable molecular methods for biodiversity monitoring programs. Both approaches were capable of discriminating among mammalian species in our test assemblages. However, because designing DNA arrays require advance knowledge of target sequences, the use of this approach could be limited in large scale monitoring programs where unknown haplotypes might be encountered. DNA barcodes, by contrast, are sequencing-based and therefore could provide more flexibility in large-scale studies.

[1]  F. Glöckner,et al.  A DNA Microarray Platform Based on Direct Detection of rRNA for Characterization of Freshwater Sediment-Related Prokaryotic Communities , 2006, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[2]  Eliot Marshall,et al.  Will DNA Bar Codes Breathe Life Into Classification? , 2005, Science.

[3]  P. Hebert,et al.  DNA barcoding of Neotropical bats: species identification and discovery within Guyana , 2007 .

[4]  N. Saitou,et al.  The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. , 1987, Molecular biology and evolution.

[5]  R. Nielsen,et al.  Statistical approaches for DNA barcoding. , 2006, Systematic biology.

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

[7]  P. Hebert,et al.  DNA barcoding: how it complements taxonomy, molecular phylogenetics and population genetics. , 2007, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[8]  D. Janzen,et al.  DNA barcodes distinguish species of tropical Lepidoptera. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  M. Ronaghi,et al.  A Sequencing Method Based on Real-Time Pyrophosphate , 1998, Science.

[10]  S. Porwollik,et al.  DNA microarray technology: a new tool for the epidemiological typing of bacterial pathogens? , 2006, FEMS immunology and medical microbiology.

[11]  Rob DeSalle,et al.  The expansion of conservation genetics , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[12]  G. Singer,et al.  Benchmarking DNA barcodes: An assessment using available primate sequences. , 2006, Genome.

[13]  Mehrdad Hajibabaei,et al.  A minimalist barcode can identify a specimen whose DNA is degraded , 2006 .

[14]  R. Baker,et al.  A TEST OF THE GENETIC SPECIES CONCEPT: CYTOCHROME-b SEQUENCES AND MAMMALS , 2001 .

[15]  Zaid Abdo,et al.  A step toward barcoding life: a model-based, decision-theoretic method to assign genes to preexisting species groups. , 2007, Systematic biology.

[16]  P. Hebert,et al.  Biological identification of springtails (Hexapoda: Collembola) from the Canadian Arctic, using mitochondrial DNA barcodes , 2004 .

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

[18]  J. Frey,et al.  Development of microarray‐based diagnostics of voles and shrews for use in biodiversity monitoring studies, and evaluation of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I vs. cytochrome b as genetic markers , 2004, Molecular ecology.

[19]  R. Ward,et al.  DNA barcoding Australia's fish species , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[20]  M. Kimura A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences , 1980, Journal of Molecular Evolution.