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

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...

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

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.