Search

Marine trophic ecology data are in high demand as natural resource agencies increasingly adopt ecosystem-based management strategies that account for complex species interactions. Harbour seal (Phoca vitulina) diet data are of particular interest because the species is an abundant predator in the northeast Pacific Ocean and Salish Sea ecosystem that consumes Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.). A multi-agency effort was therefore undertaken to produce harbour seal diet data on an ecosystem scale using, 1) a standardized set of scat collection and analysis methods, and 2) a newly developed DNA metabarcoding diet analysis technique designed to identify prey species and quantify their relative proportions in seal diets. The DNA-based dataset described herein contains records from 4,625 harbour seal scats representing 52 haulout sites, 7 years, 12 calendar months, and a total of 11,641 prey identifications. Prey morphological hard parts analyses were conducted alongside, resulting in corresponding hard parts data for 92% of the scat DNA samples. A custom-built prey DNA sequence database containing 201 species (192 fishes, 9 cephalopods) is also provided. Measurement(s) diet Technology Type(s) DNA metabarcoding diet analysis Sample Characteristic - Organism Phoca vitulina Machine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.19077809 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advances 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

DNA metabarcoding is a powerful new tool allowing characterization of species assemblages using high-throughput amplicon sequencing. The utility of DNA metabarcoding for quantifying relative species abundances is currently limited by both biological and technical biases which influence sequence read counts. We tested the idea of sequencing 50/50 mixtures of target species and a control species in order to generate relative correction factors ( RCFs) that account for multiple sources of bias and are applicable to field studies. RCFs will be most effective if they are not affected by input mass ratio or co-occurring species. In a model experiment involving three target fish species and a fixed control, we found RCFs did vary with input ratio but in a consistent fashion, and that 50/50 RCFs applied to DNA sequence counts from various mixtures of the target species still greatly improved relative abundance estimates (e.g. average per species error of 19 ± 8% for uncorrected vs. 3 ± 1% for corrected estimates). To demonstrate the use of correction factors in a field setting, we calculated 50/50 RCFs for 18 harbour seal ( Phoca vitulina) prey species ( RCFs ranging from 0.68 to 3.68). Applying these corrections to field-collected seal scats affected species percentages from individual samples (Δ 6.7 ± 6.6%) more than population-level species estimates (Δ 1.7 ± 1.2%). Our results indicate that the 50/50 RCF approach is an effective tool for evaluating and correcting biases in DNA metabarcoding studies. The decision to apply correction factors will be influenced by the feasibility of creating tissue mixtures for the target species, and the level of accuracy needed to meet research objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A goal of many environmental DNA barcoding studies is to infer quantitative information about relative abundances of different taxa based on sequence read proportions generated by high-throughput sequencing. However, potential biases associated with this approach are only beginning to be examined. We sequenced DNA amplified from faeces (scats) of captive harbour seals ( Phoca vitulina) to investigate whether sequence counts could be used to quantify the seals' diet. Seals were fed fish in fixed proportions, a chordate-specific mitochondrial 16S marker was amplified from scat DNA and amplicons sequenced using an Ion Torrent PGM™. For a given set of bioinformatic parameters, there was generally low variability between scat samples in proportions of prey species sequences recovered. However, proportions varied substantially depending on sequencing direction, level of quality filtering (due to differences in sequence quality between species) and minimum read length considered. Short primer tags used to identify individual samples also influenced species proportions. In addition, there were complex interactions between factors; for example, the effect of quality filtering was influenced by the primer tag and sequencing direction. Resequencing of a subset of samples revealed some, but not all, biases were consistent between runs. Less stringent data filtering (based on quality scores or read length) generally produced more consistent proportional data, but overall proportions of sequences were very different than dietary mass proportions, indicating additional technical or biological biases are present. Our findings highlight that quantitative interpretations of sequence proportions generated via high-throughput sequencing will require careful experimental design and thoughtful data analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]