Article first published online: 14 SEP 2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05261.x
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Issue

Molecular Ecology
Special Issue: ENVIRONMENTAL DNA
Volume 21, Issue 8, pages 1966–1979, April 2012
Additional Information
How to Cite
ANDERSEN, K., BIRD, K. L., RASMUSSEN, M., HAILE, J., BREUNING-MADSEN, H., KJÆR, K. H., ORLANDO, L., GILBERT, M. T. P. and WILLERSLEV, E. (2012), Meta-barcoding of ‘dirt’ DNA from soil reflects vertebrate biodiversity. Molecular Ecology, 21: 1966–1979. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05261.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 10 APR 2012
- Article first published online: 14 SEP 2011
- Received 5 January 2011; revision received 19 July 2011; accepted 27 July 2011
Keywords:
- meta-barcoding;
- ‘dirt’ DNA;
- environmental samples;
- DNA deposition;
- DNA leaching
Abstract
DNA molecules originating from animals and plants can be retrieved directly from sediments and have been used for reconstructing both contemporary and past ecosystems. However, the extent to which such ‘dirt’ DNA reflects taxonomic richness and structural diversity remains contentious. Here, we couple second generation high-throughput sequencing with 16S mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) meta-barcoding, to explore the accuracy and sensitivity of ‘dirt’ DNA as an indicator of vertebrate diversity, from soil sampled at safari parks, zoological gardens and farms with known species compositions. PCR amplification was successful in the full pH range of the investigated soils (6.2 ± 0.2 to 8.3 ± 0.2), but inhibition was detected in extracts from soil of high organic content. DNA movement (leaching) through strata was evident in some sporadic cases and is influenced by soil texture and structure. We find that DNA from the soil surface reflects overall taxonomic richness and relative biomass of individual species. However, one species that was recently introduced was not detected. Furthermore, animal behaviour was shown to influence DNA deposition rates. The approach potentially provides a quick methodological alternative to classical ecological surveys of biodiversity, and most reliable results are obtained with spatial sample replicates, while relative amounts of soil processed per site is of less importance.

1365-294X/asset/MEC_centre.gif?v=1&s=a3addb330bee9658564df3325c89548d75a4238d)
