Application of DNA barcoding for identification of freshwater carnivorous fish diets: Is number of prey items dependent on size class for Micropterus salmoides?

Understanding predator–prey interactions is a major challenge in ecological studies. In particular, the accurate identification of prey is a fundamental requirement in elucidating food-web structure. This study took a molecular approach in determining the species identity of consumed prey items of a freshwater carnivorous fish (largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides), according to their size class. Thirty randomly selected gut samples were categorized into three size classes, based on the total length of the bass. Using the universal primer for the mtDNA cytochrome oxidase I (COI) region, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification was performed on unidentified gut contents and then sequenced after cloning. Two gut samples were completely empty, and DNA materials from 27 of 28 gut samples were successfully amplified by PCR (success rate: 96.4%). Sequence database navigation yielded a total of 308 clones, containing DNA from 26 prey items. They comprised four phyla, including seven classes, 12 orders, and 12 families based on BLAST and BOLD database searches. The results indicate that largemouth bass show selective preferences in prey item consumption as they mature. These results corroborate a hypothesis, presence of ontogenetic diet shift, derived through other methodological approaches. Despite the practical limitations inherent in DNA barcoding analysis, high-resolution (i.e., species level) identification was possible, and the predation patterns of predators of different sizes were identifiable. The utilization of this method is strongly recommended for determining specific predator–prey relationships in complex freshwater ecosystems.

[1]  L. Pinkas,et al.  Fish Bulletin 152. Food Habits of Albacore, Bluefin Tuna, and Bonito In California Waters , 1970 .

[2]  J. Felsenstein.  CONFIDENCE LIMITS ON PHYLOGENIES: AN APPROACH USING THE BOOTSTRAP , 1985, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

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

[4]  R. Welcomme,et al.  International Introductions of Inland Aquatic Species , 1989 .

[5]  L. Greenberg,et al.  Juvenile Competitive Bottlenecks: The Perch (Perca Fluviatilis)-Roach (Rutilus Rutilus) Interaction , 1990 .

[6]  R. Vrijenhoek,et al.  DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. , 1994, Molecular marine biology and biotechnology.

[7]  P. Amundsen,et al.  A new approach to graphical analysis of feeding strategy from stomach contents data—modification of the Costello (1990) method , 1996 .

[8]  M. H. Olson.  Ontogenetic Niche Shifts in Largemouth Bass: Variability and Consequences for First‐Year Growth , 1996 .

[9]  T. Fritts,et al.  THE ROLE OF INTRODUCED SPECIES IN THE DEGRADATION OF ISLAND ECOSYSTEMS: A Case History of Guam1 , 1998 .

[10]  E. García‐Berthou.  Ontogenetic diet shifts and interrupted piscivoryin introduced largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) , 2002 .

[11]  N. Rohland,et al.  Molecular analysis of a 11 700‐year‐old rodent midden from the Atacama Desert, Chile , 2002, Molecular ecology.

[12]  D. Post.  INDIVIDUAL VARIATION IN THE TIMING OF ONTOGENETIC NICHE SHIFTS IN LARGEMOUTH BASS , 2003 .

[13]  Saúl Blanco,et al.  Fish communities and food web interactions in some shallow Mediterranean lakes , 2003, Hydrobiologia.

[14]  G. Joo,et al.  The Evaluation of Early Growth Pattern of Miscanthus sacchariflorus after Cutting and Burning in the Woopo Wetland , 2004 .

[15]  B. Deagle,et al.  Group‐specific polymerase chain reaction for DNA‐based analysis of species diversity and identity in dietary samples , 2004, Molecular ecology.

[16]  L. E. BLANKENSHIP,et al.  Universal primers and PCR of gut contents to study marine invertebrate diets , 2005, Molecular ecology.

[17]  S. Sheppard,et al.  Advances in molecular ecology: tracking trophic links through predator–prey food‐webs , 2005 .

[18]  G. Joo,et al.  Diet of introduced largemouth bass in Korean rivers and potential interactions with native fishes , 2006 .

[19]  N. Yamamura,et al.  Larger body size with higher predation rate , 2007 .

[20]  Rodrigo Lopez,et al.  Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0 , 2007, Bioinform..

[21]  P. Palange,et al.  From the authors , 2007, European Respiratory Journal.

[22]  G. Yan,et al.  Gut content identification of larvae of the Anopheles gambiae complex in western Kenya using a barcoding approach , 2008, Molecular ecology resources.

[23]  Jens C. Nejstgaard,et al.  Quantitative PCR to estimate copepod feeding , 2008 .

[24]  Resource heterogeneity, diet shifts and intra-cohort competition: effects on size divergence in YOY fish , 2008, Oecologia.

[25]  David C. Smith,et al.  Measurement of copepod predation on nauplii using qPCR of the cytochrome oxidase I gene , 2008 .

[26]  P. Hebert,et al.  Species on the menu of a generalist predator, the eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis): using a molecular approach to detect arthropod prey , 2009, Molecular ecology.

[27]  D. Heath,et al.  Revolution in food web analysis and trophic ecology: diet analysis by DNA and stable isotope analysis , 2010, Molecular ecology.

[28]  M. Hill,et al.  The effect of largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides on aquatic macro-invertebrate communities in the Wit River, Eastern Cape, South Africa , 2010 .

[29]  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.

[30]  L. Riemann,et al.  Qualitative assessment of the diet of European eel larvae in the Sargasso Sea resolved by DNA barcoding , 2010, Biology Letters.

[31]  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.

[32]  S. Shikano,et al.  Size-dependent ontogenetic diet shifts to piscivory documented from stable isotope analyses in an introduced population of largemouth bass , 2011, Environmental Biology of Fishes.

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

[34]  O. Weyl,et al.  Invasion of a Headwater Stream by Non-Native Fishes in the Swartkops River System, South Africa , 2011 .

[35]  G. Joo,et al.  Long-term changes in fish community and the impact of exotic fish, between the Nakdong River and Upo Wetlands , 2011 .

[36]  M. Nei,et al.  MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. , 2011, Molecular biology and evolution.

[37]  P. Taberlet,et al.  Who is eating what: diet assessment using next generation sequencing , 2012, Molecular ecology.

[38]  T. Rynearson,et al.  Copepod feeding and digestion rates using prey DNA and qPCR , 2012 .

[39]  N. Baeshen,et al.  Biological Identifications Through DNA Barcodes , 2012 .

[40]  T. Rynearson,et al.  Krill feeding on sediment in the Gulf of Maine (North Atlantic) , 2012 .

[41]  A. Jeffs,et al.  Determining the Diet of Larvae of Western Rock Lobster (Panulirus cygnus) Using High-Throughput DNA Sequencing Techniques , 2012, PloS one.

[42]  Dany Garant,et al.  A road map for molecular ecology , 2013, Molecular ecology.

[43]  W. Kimmerer,et al.  A DNA-based method for investigating feeding by copepod nauplii , 2014 .