欢迎访问《中国农学通报》，
中国农学通报

中国农学通报 ›› 2023, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (6): 157-164.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0317

所属专题： 生物技术； 水产渔业； 农业工程

• 水产·渔业 • 上一篇    

环境DNA宏条形码技术应用于溪流和水库鱼类物种多样性监测的敏感性和有效性评估

颉志刚1,2(), 阮高1   

  1. 1 浙江省野生动物生物技术与保护利用重点实验室，浙江师范大学化学与生命科学学院，浙江金华 321004
    2 浙江省农业科研院水生生物研究所，杭州 310021
  • 收稿日期:2022-04-21 修回日期:2022-09-20 出版日期:2023-02-25 发布日期:2023-02-22
  • 作者简介:

    颉志刚，男，1978年出生，河北张家口人，副教授，博士，研究方向：水生生态学。通信地址：321004 浙江省金华市婺城区迎宾大道688号 浙江师范大学化学与生命科学学院，E-mail：。

  • 基金资助:
    遂昌县渔业资源调查项目(FYSC2018B12-公08号)

Sensitivity and Effectiveness Evaluation of Environmental DNA Metabarcoding for Monitoring Fish Species Diversity in Stream and Reservoir Waters

XIE Zhigang1,2(), RUAN Gao1   

  1. 1 Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Biotechnology and Protective Utilization of Wild Animals, College of Chemistry and Life Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, Zhejiang 321004
    2 Institute of Hydrobiology, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou 310021
  • Received:2022-04-21 Revised:2022-09-20 Online:2023-02-25 Published:2023-02-22

RichHTML

8

PDF (PC)

45

摘要：

环境DNA宏条形码(Environmental DNA metabarcoding, eDNA metabarcoding)技术在调查鱼类物种丰度和多样性方面具有快速、高效、环境友好等优势，但其敏感性和有效性需进一步评估。本研究选择位于瓯江水系上游一级支流松荫溪发源地的高碧溪和成屏水库作为调查水域，分别利用传统捕捞方法和eDNA宏条形码技术对2个水域的鱼类物种进行调查。结果表明：捕捞方法在2个水域共发现鱼类24种，88%鱼类物种（21种）在瓯江水系有记录，其中高碧溪采集到鱼类12种，隶属于4目8科11属，成屏水库采集到鱼类16种，隶属于3目4科14属。eDNA宏条形码技术在2个水域共检测到鱼类31种，有84%的物种（26种）在瓯江水系有记录，其中高碧溪共检测出28种，隶属于5目12科25属，成屏水库共检测出27种，隶属于6目11科25属。然而，2种调查方法在溪流中共同发现的鱼类仅1种，在水库中共同发现的鱼类也只有5种。此外，高碧溪Shannon多样性指数、Simpson多样性指数、Margalef丰度指数以及Pielou均匀度指数均高于成屏水库，且2种调查方式得出的结论较为一致。由此可见，eDNA宏条形码技术比传统调查方法能够发现更多物种，具有更高的敏感性，但与实际捕获的鱼类物种组成存在较大差异，因此本研究认为eDNA宏条形码技术目前仅可以作为传统渔业调查方法的参考依据，利用该技术给出的调查结论需持谨慎态度。

关键词: 环境DNA宏条形码, 传统捕捞调查, 鱼类资源, 物种检测, 物种丰度, 多样性

Abstract:

Environmental DNA metabarcoding (eDNA metabarcoding) is a fast, efficient and environmentally friendly method to investigate the diversity of fish species, but its sensitivity and reliability remain to be further evaluated. In this study, Gaobi Stream and Chengping Reservoir, located in the source region of Songyin Stream, a first level tributary of Oujiang River, were selected as the investigated waters, and the survey on fish species distributed in those two waters was carried out by traditional capture-based method and eDNA metabarcoding technology, respectively. The results showed that a total of 24 species of fish were found in the two waters by capture-based method, 88% (21 species) of fish species were recorded in the Oujiang River system. 12 fish species belonging to 4 orders, 8 families, and 11 genera were collected from Gaobi River, and 16 species of fish belonging to 3 orders, 4 families and 14 genera were collected from Chengping Reservoir. A total of 31 species were detected in the two waters by eDNA metabarcoding technology, and 84% (26 species) of fish species were recorded in the Oujiang River system. 28 fish species were found in Gaobi Stream, belonging to 5 orders, 12 families and 25 genera, and 27 species were found in Chengping Reservoir, belonging to 6 orders, 11 families, and 25 genera. However, the two survey methods found only one fish species together in the stream water and only five in the reservoir water. In addition, Shannon diversity index, Simpson diversity index, Margalef’s richness index and Pielou’s evenness of Gaobi Sream were higher than those of Chengping Reservoir, and the conclusions of the two survey methods were relatively consistent. In conclusion, eDNA metabarcoding can find more species and has higher sensitivity than the traditional method, but its results of fish species composition have a marked deviation from those of actual capture. Therefore, eDNA metabarcoding technology can only be used as reference for traditional fishery survey methods at present, and it is necessary to be cautious in drawing survey conclusions by using this technology.

Key words: environmental DNA metabarcoding, traditional capture-based method, fish resources, species detection, species richness, diversity