Ants in Australia’s Monsoonal Tropics: CO1 Barcoding Reveals Extensive Unrecognised Diversity

Key factors to consider in the use of environmental DNA metabarcoding to monitor terrestrial ecological restoration

Ecological restoration of terrestrial environments is a globally important process to combat the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Holistic monitoring of restored biota and active management of restoration is necessary to improve restoration processes and outcomes, and provide evidence to stakeholders that targets are being achieved. Increasingly, environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is used as a restoration monitoring tool because it is able to generate biodiversity data rapidly, accurately, non-destructively, and reliably, on a wide breadth of organisms from soil microbes to mammals. The overall objective of this review is to discuss the key factors to consider in the use of environmental DNA for monitoring of restored terrestrial ecosystems, hopefully improving monitoring, and ultimately, restoration outcomes. We identified that the majority of eDNA based studies of ecosystem restoration are currently conducted in Europe, North America, and Australia, and that almost half of total studies were published in 2021-22. Soil was the most popular sample substrate, soil microbial communities the most targeted taxa, and forests the most studied ecosystem. We suggest there is no 'one size fits all' approach to restoration monitoring using eDNA, and discuss survey design. Factors to consider include substrate selection, sample collection and storage, assay selection, and data interpretation, all of which require careful planning to obtain reliable, and accurate information that can be used for restoration monitoring and decision making. We explore future directions for research and argue that eDNA metabarcoding can be a useful tool in the restoration monitoring 'toolkit', but requires informed application and greater accessibility to data by a wide spectrum of stakeholders.

Multiple species delimitation approaches with COI barcodes poorly fit each other and morphospecies – An integrative taxonomy case of Sri Lankan Sericini chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae)

DNA taxonomy including barcoding and metabarcoding is widely used to explore the diversity in biodiversity hotspots. In most of these hotspot areas, chafers are represented by a multitude of species, which are well defined by the complex shape of male genitalia. Here, we explore how well COI barcode data reflect morphological species entities and thus their usability for accelerated species inventorization. We conducted dedicated field surveys in Sri Lanka to collect the species‐rich and highly endemic Sericini chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Congruence among results of a series of protocols for de novo species delimitation and with morphology‐based species identifications was investigated. Different delimitation methods, such as the Poisson tree processes (PTP) model, Statistical Parsimony Analysis (TCS), Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD), Assemble Species by Automatic Partitioning (ASAP), and Barcode Index Number (BIN) assignments, resulted in different numbers of molecular operational taxonomic units (MOTUs). All methods showed both over‐splitting and lumping of morphologically identified species. Only 18 of the observed 45 morphospecies perfectly matched MOTUs from all methods. The congruence of delimitation between MOTUs and morphospecies expressed by the match ratio was low, ranging from 0.57 to 0.67. TCS and multirate PTP (mPTP) showed the highest match ratio, while (BIN) assignment resulted in the lowest match ratio and most splitting events. mPTP lumped more species than any other method. Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) on a match ratio‐based distance matrix revealed incongruent outcomes of multiple DNA delimitation methods, although applied to the same data. Our results confirm that COI barcode data alone are unlikely to correctly delimit all species, in particular, when using only a single delimitation approach. We encourage the integration of various approaches and data, particularly morphology, to validate species boundaries.

The ecosystem services provided by social insects: traits, management tools and knowledge gaps

Social insects, i.e. ants, bees, wasps and termites, are key components of ecological communities, and are important ecosystem services (ESs) providers. Here, we review the literature in order to (i) analyse the particular traits of social insects that make them good suppliers of ESs; (ii) compile and assess management strategies that improve the services provided by social insects; and (iii) detect gaps in our knowledge about the services that social insects provide. Social insects provide at least 10 ESs; however, many of them are poorly understood or valued. Relevant traits of social insects include high biomass and numerical abundance, a diversity of mutualistic associations, the ability to build important biogenic structures, versatile production of chemical defences, the simultaneous delivery of several ESs, the presence of castes and division of labour, efficient communication and cooperation, the capacity to store food, and a long lifespan. All these characteristics enhance social insects as ES providers, highlighting their potential, constancy and efficiency as suppliers of these services. In turn, many of these traits make social insects stress tolerant and easy to manage, so increasing the ESs they provide. We emphasise the need for a conservation approach to the management of the services, as well as the potential use of social insects to help restore habitats degraded by human activities. In addition, we stress the need to evaluate both services and disservices in an integrated way, because some species of social insects are among the most problematic invasive species and native pests. Finally, we propose two areas of research that will lead to a greater and more efficient use of social insects as ES providers, and to a greater appreciation of them by producers and decision-makers.

Molecular diversity and species delimitation in the family Gasteruptiidae (Hymenoptera: Evanioidea)

Gasteruptiidae Ashmead is an easily recognised family of wasps with ∼589 described species worldwide. Although well characterised by traditional taxonomy, multiple authors have commented on the extreme morphological uniformity of the group, making species-level identification difficult. This problem is enhanced by the lack of molecular data and molecular phylogenetic research for the group. We used 187 cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) barcodes to explore the efficiency of sequence data to delimitate species in Gasteruptiidae. We undertook a graphical and discussion-based comparison of six methods for species delimitation, with the success of methods judged based on known species boundaries and morphology. Both distance-based (ABGD and jMOTU threshold analysis) and tree-based (GMYC and PTP) methods compared across multiple parameters recovered variable molecular operational taxonomic units (MOTUs), ranging from 55 to 123 MOTUs. Tree-based methods tended to split known morphological species less than distance-based methods, with the single-threshold GMYC method the most concordant with known morphospecies. Our results suggest that the incorporation of molecular species delimitation techniques provides a powerful tool to assist in the interpretation of species and help direct informed decisions with taxonomic uncertainty in the family.