Back

Fine-scale ecological biomonitoring in a large, complex agriculturally impacted watershed via eDNA metabarcoding

Silva, B. S. M. L. e.; Riley, A. C.; Craiovan, E.; Wright, M.; Watson, K.; Lapen, D. R.; Hajibabaei, M.

2025-11-27 ecology
10.1101/2025.11.24.690238 bioRxiv
Show abstract

DNA-based approaches utilizing high-throughput sequencing (HTS) (e.g. DNA metabarcoding) have revolutionized ecological biomonitoring by providing higher sample throughput, greater reproducibility, and better cost-benefits compared to traditional morphology-based bioassessment studies. Here, we utilized DNA metabarcoding in a watershed in Ontario (Canada) dominated by agricultural land uses. Our aim is to understand patterns of biodiversity in benthic taxa from data generated and inferred at various taxonomic scales and to compare these findings with over a decade of traditional morphological data. We sampled 18 watercourses during summer and fall 2023, spanning a forested-to-agricultural land-use gradient. We found significant differences between metabarcoding and historical morphology data where DNA provided more richness values at both the species (p = 2x10-5) and order (p = 0.008) levels. Whereas the morphology dataset contained many unresolved taxa, DNA metabarcoding captured a broader taxonomic breadth with diverse genetic profiles among taxa. Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) analyses on DNA metabarcoding data produced tighter clusters, more precise separation by land use, and greater consistency across taxonomic scales. Both urban context and land use had significant associations with metabarcoding patterns observed, with differences being strongest between agriculturally-dominated and primarily forested sites (median R{superscript 2} {approx} 0.08-0.11). We also found strong, consistent environmental signals linked to agricultural settings, such as water conductivity and turbidity, and pH. Altogether, our DNA-based results demonstrate the differences in community composition among different land uses in this watershed. Importantly, our work highlights the need for more taxonomic resolution (obtained through DNA analysis) to decipher community changes linked to anthropogenic and environmental drivers, as morphological data alone may lack the precision needed to capture these patterns.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Environmental DNA
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
33.2%
2
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
10.5%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 23%
8.3%
50% of probability mass above
4
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.9%
5
Water Research
74 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.3%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 40%
3.3%
7
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
8
Environmental Pollution
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
9
FACETS
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
10
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
11
Journal of Environmental Management
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
12
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
13
Ecological Indicators
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
14
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
15
Limnology and Oceanography: Methods
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
16
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
17
Communications Earth & Environment
14 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
18
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.9%
19
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
20
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
Chemosphere
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
22
Freshwater Biology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
23
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
24
Ecosphere
53 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
25
Frontiers in Marine Science
55 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
26
PLOS Water
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
27
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
301 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
28
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
29
mSystems
361 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%
30
Ecological Informatics
29 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.5%