Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDeagle, BEen_US
dc.contributor.authorThomas, ACen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcInnes, JCen_US
dc.contributor.authorClarke, LJen_US
dc.contributor.authorVesterinen, EJen_US
dc.contributor.authorClare, ELen_US
dc.contributor.authorKartzinel, TRen_US
dc.contributor.authorEveson, JPen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-12T13:04:59Z
dc.date.available2018-06-02en_US
dc.date.issued2019-01en_US
dc.date.submitted2018-06-07T13:15:34.463Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/39549
dc.description.abstractAdvances in DNA sequencing technology have revolutionized the field of molecular analysis of trophic interactions, and it is now possible to recover counts of food DNA sequences from a wide range of dietary samples. But what do these counts mean? To obtain an accurate estimate of a consumer's diet should we work strictly with data sets summarizing frequency of occurrence of different food taxa, or is it possible to use relative number of sequences? Both approaches are applied to obtain semi-quantitative diet summaries, but occurrence data are often promoted as a more conservative and reliable option due to taxa-specific biases in recovery of sequences. We explore representative dietary metabarcoding data sets and point out that diet summaries based on occurrence data often overestimate the importance of food consumed in small quantities (potentially including low-level contaminants) and are sensitive to the count threshold used to define an occurrence. Our simulations indicate that using relative read abundance (RRA) information often provides a more accurate view of population-level diet even with moderate recovery biases incorporated; however, RRA summaries are sensitive to recovery biases impacting common diet taxa. Both approaches are more accurate when the mean number of food taxa in samples is small. The ideas presented here highlight the need to consider all sources of bias and to justify the methods used to interpret count data in dietary metabarcoding studies. We encourage researchers to continue addressing methodological challenges and acknowledge unanswered questions to help spur future investigations in this rapidly developing area of research.en_US
dc.format.extent391 - 406en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofMol Ecolen_US
dc.rightsThis is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Molecular Ecology following peer review. The version of record is available https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mec.14734
dc.titleCounting with DNA in metabarcoding studies: How should we convert sequence reads to dietary data?en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holderCopyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/mec.14734en_US
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29858539en_US
pubs.issue2en_US
pubs.notesNo embargoen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_US
pubs.volume28en_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-05-30en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record