
==== Front
Mol Biol Rep
Mol Biol Rep
Molecular Biology Reports
0301-4851
1573-4978
Springer Netherlands Dordrecht

9885
10.1007/s11033-024-09885-9
Original Article
Using grass inflorescence as source material for biomonitoring through environmental DNA metabarcoding
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2189-5539
Coetzer Willem G. coetzerwg@outlook.com

12
1 https://ror.org/0184vwv17 grid.413110.6 0000 0001 2152 8048 Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Fort Hare, Private Bag X1314, Alice, 5700 Eastern Cape South Africa
2 https://ror.org/009xwd568 grid.412219.d 0000 0001 2284 638X Department of Genetics, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, Free State South Africa
16 9 2024
16 9 2024
2024
51 1 98726 3 2024
22 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Background

Over the last decade, increasing attention has been directed to using different substrates as sources of environmental DNA (eDNA) in ecological research. Reports on the use of environmental DNA located on the surface of plant leaves and flowers have highlighted the utility of this DNA source in studies including, but not limited to, biodiversity, invasive species, and pollination ecology. The current study assesses grass inflorescence as a source of eDNA for detecting invertebrate taxa.

Methods and results

Inflorescences from four common grass species in a central South African grassland were collected for high-throughput sequencing analysis. Universal COI primers were utilised to detect Metazoan diversity. The sequencing results allowed for the detection of three Arthropoda orders, with most OTUs assigned to fungal taxa (Ascomycota and Basidiomycota). Some biases were detected while observing the relative read abundance (RRA) results.

Discussion

The observed biases could be explained by the accidental inclusion of invertebrate specimens during sample collection and DNA extraction. Primer biases towards the amplified taxa could be another reason for the observed RRA results. This study provided insight into the invertebrate community associated with the four sampled grass species. It should be noted that with the lack of negative field controls, it is impossible to rule out the influence of airborne eDNA on the observed diversity associated with each grass species. The lack of the inclusion of PCR and extraction blanks in the sequencing step, as well as the inclusion of negative field controls, including other areas for refinement were highlighted, and suggestions were provided to improve the outcomes of future studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11033-024-09885-9.

Keywords

High-throughput sequencing
Metabarcoding
Biodiversity assessment
Plant surface eDNA
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001321 National Research Foundation Incentive Funding for Rated Researchers (IFRR) grant University of Fort HareOpen access funding provided by University of Fort Hare.

issue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature B.V. 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

The use of DNA metabarcoding in studies related to molecular ecology and biodiversity has grown substantially over the years [1]. This method is a useful tool for biodiversity monitoring of small and elusive organisms, and has been successfully used in pollination studies [2], identifying vertebrate and invertebrate diets through metabarcoding of faecal matter or gut content [3], invasion biology [4] and monitoring of animal and plant communities [5, 6]. Environmental DNA (eDNA) can be detected from various substrates, ranging from marine and freshwater ecosystems using sediment and water samples, soil and plant material [7].

Recent advances in molecular techniques are allowing the use of an expanding list of possible substrates available for eDNA metabarcoding-driven biomonitoring studies. Reports showed how vertebrate biodiversity can be assessed using bulk insect samples [8]. The use of faecal samples to determine general biodiversity in an ecosystem has also been demonstrated [8, 9], with faecal samples from generalist omnivore species identified as a valuable source of eDNA, capable of detecting plant, vertebrate and invertebrate taxa found in the study area [9]. Several studies have recently reported on the utility of airborne eDNA to assess terrestrial biodiversity [10]; and references therein]. These various techniques and available substrates open a wide range of research possibilities for biodiversity studies in difficult-to-navigate terrain or studies focusing on elusive taxa. These methods can also provide an alternative for quick initial surveys to allow for the planning of future in-depth studies, therefore saving valuable time.

Collecting eDNA from plant surfaces is one novel method that has received attention from molecular ecologists over the last few years. A review by Banerjee et al. [11] highlights several examples of studies focussing on plant-animal interactions using eDNA methods. The study by Thomsen and Sigsgaard [12], for example, demonstrated the breadth of biodiversity information obtainable from plant surface eDNA. Flowers from different plant species were sampled across the study region, and the authors were able to detect a large amount of invertebrate diversity, with plant species-specific patterns identified [12]. Such information can assist in studying insect-plant pollination and food networks (plant–parasitoid or plant-herbivore) and detect interactions not easily observed by the eye [13]. Monge et al. [14] reported on the isolation of avian DNA from partially consumed fruits, and showed how the extracted eDNA is suitable for avian frugivore species identification and population genetics. The use of plant leaf material to detect a wide array of vertebrate and invertebrate taxa was reported by van der Heyde et al. [8] while testing the utility of different substrates for use in eDNA metabarcoding studies. eDNA metabarcoding is also an excellent tool for detecting invasive plant pests [15] and providing an effective means of invasive pest control management.

Globally, grasslands comprise 40% of terrestrial land area [16]. Grassland biomes provide crucial ecosystem services to the human communities living in and around these areas (e.g. grazing of livestock, collection of native plants and hunting) [17], and play critical ecosystem functions (e.g. carbon sequestration, water regulation and climate regulation) [18]. Large portions of South Africa are covered by the Grassland biome (16.5%), with the major plant taxon being grasses (Poaceae) [19, 20]. Grasslands are highly biodiverse habitats, which supports the ecosystem services and functions observed for these biomes [21]. Despite being such a crucial ecosystem, South African grasslands are not receiving the level of conservation attention which is needed [20, 21], and the multifunctional roles grasslands play in the ecosystem is quite understudied [18].

Here, I report on a pilot study to detect invertebrate visitations to grasses in the central Free State Province of South Africa using eDNA metabarcoding. Grasses are mainly wind-pollinated, but some cases of insect pollinators have been reported [22]. Many invertebrates also feed on grasses, and their predator species will also be present on grass surfaces, potentially leaving some eDNA behind. An unintentional outcome of the study included a large amount of fungal sequence data, providing additional information on the fungal community composition of the selected grass species. This pilot study will provide insight into possible areas that need optimisation for future larger-scale studies.

Materials and methods

Sample collection

Samples were collected from an urban grassland habitat on the University of the Free State (UFS) campus, Bloemfontein (Free State Province, South Africa). This region falls in the Dry Highveld Grassland Bioregion of the Grassland biome [19]. Several species of native trees (Searsia lancea, Acacia (Vachellia) karroo, Olea europaea subsp. cuspidate), planted as windbreaks, are interspersed within this urban grassland. Four grass species common to the area were selected. Inflorescence were collected from two species with false panicles (Cymbopogon caesius and Themeda triandra) and two species with open panicles (Panicum coloratum and Sporobolus fimbriatus) [23] within a 13 000 m2 area on the UFS, Bloemfontein campus (Fig. 1; Table 1). Four plants were sampled per grass species from four sites within the sampling block (n = 16 samples), four samples per grass species across all sites. Sample sites were, on average, 103.5 m apart (75–140 m). Sampled grasses at each site were between 8–12 m apart. Three to four spikelets (~ 4 cm long) were collected from each plant for the false panicle species. Three to four inflorescence branches were collected from each plant of open panicle species, as the individual spikelets are small in these species. New sterile gloves were used between sampling events, and the forceps and scissors were sterilized with 1.25% hypochlorite and 96% ethanol before each sample collection. Samples from each plant were placed in separate sterile 15ml plastic screw cap tubes, taking care not to include any invertebrates. The 16 samples were named FCC.1- FCC.4 (Cymbopogon caesius), FTT.1- FTT.4 (Themeda triandra), FPC.1- FPC.4 (Panicum coloratum) and FSF.1- FSF.4 (Sporobolus fimbriatus). The tubes were placed in a cooler bag with an ice pack while in the field and then moved to – 20 °C storage until DNA extraction. No field blanks were included.Fig. 1 The location of the four samples sites within an urban grassland habitat at the University of the Free State Bloemfontein campus grounds. Native trees (Searsia lancea, Acacia (Vachellia) karroo, Olea europaea subsp. cuspidate) planted as windbreaks are interspersed within the grassland. The map was sourced from Google [24]. (Color figure online)

Table 1 The GPS coordinates for the sample sites where all grass inflorescence samples were collected. Inflorescence from all grass species targeted for this study were sampled per site. The study sites are situated in an urban grassland setting at the University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa

Sample sites	Lat	Long	Sample ID	Grass species:	
Site 1	− 29.111826	26.18056	FCP.1	Cymbopogon caesius	
FPC.1	Panicum coloratum	
FSF.1	Sporobolus fimbriatus	
FTT.1	Themeda triandra	
Site 2	− 29.112546	26.18039	FCP.2	Cymbopogon caesius	
FPC.2	Panicum coloratum	
FSF.2	Sporobolus fimbriatus	
FTT.2	Themeda triandra	
Site 3	− 29.112795	26.17966	FCP.3	Cymbopogon caesius	
FPC.3	Panicum coloratum	
FSF.3	Sporobolus fimbriatus	
FTT.3	Themeda triandra	
Site 4	− 29.112155	26.17927	FCP.4	Cymbopogon caesius	
FPC.4	Panicum coloratum	
FSF.4	Sporobolus fimbriatus	
FTT.4	Themeda triandra	

DNA extraction

Surface genomic DNA was extracted from each sample using the Purelink Genomic DNA Kit (Life Technologies ™, Carlsbad, CA), following the manufacturer’s protocol for Buccal swab DNA extraction, with modifications. Subsamples of two spikelets for each false panicle sample, and two pieces of inflorescence branches, ~ 1.5 cm in length, for each open panicle sample were used for DNA extraction. The subsamples were placed in a 1.5 ml microcentrifuge tube containing 180 µl PureLink™ Genomic Digestion Buffer and 20 µl Proteinase K, ensuring the sample was completely immersed in the buffer mixture. The samples were incubated at 55 °C for 1 h, and the manufacturer’s protocol was thereafter followed. The DNA extractions were performed in two batches, one with all false panicle grass species and one with all open panicle grass species. Each sample was manually inspected to ensure no observable invertebrates were present before DNA extraction. A negative control extract was performed with each batch to assess any DNA contamination during the laboratory procedures. All work surfaces and equipment were sterilized using a 1.25% hypochlorite solution before and after each DNA extract. The DNA extracts, including the negative control, were assessed via gel electrophoresis on a 2% agarose gel. The negative control showed no signs of DNA on the gel and was not included in the remainder of the workflow. Nucleotide purity and quantity measurements were taken via spectrophotometry using a NanoDrop® Spectrophotometer ND-1000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, DE, USA). The DNA extracts were stored at − 20 °C.

DNA amplification and high-throughput sequencing

All DNA extracts were diluted to ~ 50 ng/µl and sent to MR DNA laboratories (Shallowater, TX, USA) for high throughput sequencing (HTS). A 313 bp fragment of the COI barcode gene was targeted using the primers Sauron [5’-GGDRCWGGWTGAACWGTWTAYCCNCC-3’; 25] and jgHCO2198 [5’- TAIACYTCIGGRTGICCRAARAAYCA-3’; [26] following in-house protocols at MR DNA laboratories. Sample specific barcodes were attached to the forward primers (Supplementary Table S1). Two PCR replicates were performed per sample, with no-template controls included in each PCR reaction. The PCR amplification success was evaluated by gel electrophoresis on a 2% agarose gel. The PCR amplicons were pooled and purified using calibrated Ampure XP beads (Beckman Coulter, Brea CA, USA), followed by an Illumina DNA library preparation protocol based on Rennstam Rubbmark et al. [25]. The PCR blanks were not included in the sequencing process. All HTS were performed on an Illumina MiSeq system following the manufacturer’s guidelines at MR DNA laboratories. All raw sequences are stored under BioProject PRJNA935099 (Assession numbers SAMN33297822-SAMN33297837) on the NCBI GenBank database.

Sequence analysis

Raw data processing was performed using QIIME2 [27]. In summary, the data was first demultiplexed, and primers were then removed using the cutadapt plug-in [28]. The dada2 plug-in, with command denoise-paired and using the pseudo pooling method, was used to trim the reads only to include high-quality sequences (quality score > 30), whereafter the reads were denoised, merged and chimeras removed [29]. Amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) with an overall sequence abundance of less than ten were removed from the feature table and sequence files using the feature-table filter-features and filter-seqs commands. The dataset was further curated using the R package LULU v.0.1.0 prior to taxonomic identification to reduce the number of erroneous ASVs [30]. To simplify species identification, all curated ASVs were clustered to operational taxonomic units (OTUs) through de novo clustering using the vsearch cluster-features-de-novo command in QIIME2.

Taxonomic assignment

The classify-consensus-blast feature classifier was used in QIIME2 for taxonomic assignment, using the MIDORI2 [31] Unique COI database (vGB260; released 15 April 2024). The percentage identity was set at 80%, and query coverage at 85%. A similar approach for the percentage identity setting was recently implemented by Mugnai et al. [32]. The authors suggested that a high identity threshold would be more suited to studies where the target taxa are well represented in the reference databases. The identity threshold of 0.8 selected in the current study is based on the assumption that South African representative sequences, such as those from Arthropods, are not well represented in online databases [33]. Curated Arthropoda and Fungi datasets were then created using the filtering options in QIIME2.

Statistical analysis

Rarefaction curves were plotted for each dataset (Arthropoda and Fungi) per sample using the vegan package [34] in R [35]. Each dataset was rarefied, using the rarefy_even_depth function (rngseed = 1,121,983) in the phyloseq package [36] for R to compensate for uneven sequencing coverage prior to further statistical analyses. The relative read abundance (RRA) was visualised with bar plots for each dataset using the phyloseq and ggplot2 packages [37] in R, grouping the data according to sample origin (i.e. grass species) and sample type (i.e. false panicles and open panicles). Alpha diversity indices (Community richness: Observed richness [38] and Chao1 index [39]; Diversity: Shannon’s diversity index [40] and Simpson’s diversity index [41]) were estimated in the phyloseq package. Possible differences in alpha diversity indices between grass species and sample sites were assessed by a Kruskal–Wallis test [42]. The R package Rhea [43] was used to estimate beta diversity estimates using the Generalized Unifrac measure [44], which were visualized via NMDS plots and significant differences assessed via permutational multivariate ANOVA (PERMANOVA) analysis.

Results

Sequencing success and taxonomy

A total of 796 350 raw sequence reads were generated prior to filtering. Following denoising, chimera removal, and feature filtering, 692 626 reads (87%) were retained. The majority of the reads (98%) were observed in six samples, with the remaining samples showing low read recovery, with less than 5 000 reads (range = 97–4 225). Seven samples retained less than 50% of their initial input (Supplementary Table S1). The sample rarefaction curves indicated that only three samples were sufficiently sampled for the Arthropoda analysis (FCP.3, FPC.1 and FPC.2), and four samples were sufficiently sampled for the Fungal analysis (FCP.3, FTT.4, FPC.1 and FPC.2; Supplementary Figure S1).

Following the abundance filtering and curation via LULU, a total of 124 ASVs, represented by 692 005 reads, were retained for taxonomic identification. These ASVs were then further clustered to 50 OTUs. Fourteen OTUs had no taxonomic assignments, five OTUs were identified as Chordata (Cirripectes vanderbilti, Homo sapiens, unknown Phasianidae and Gallus gallus) and three OTUs identified as taxa belonging to the family Poaceae. These 22 OTUs were subsequently removed from the datasets. For the 28 retained OTUs, seven OTUs were assigned to Arthropoda (246 027 reads) and the remaining 21 to Fungi (Ascomycota, n = 14; Basidiomycota, n = 6; Oomycota, n = 1; 304 456 reads).

The seven Arthropoda OTUs were assigned to four orders (Coleoptera, Diptera, Thysanoptera, Trombidiformes; Fig. 2). The lowest taxonomic placement for the Coleopteran OTU was order, with the Dipteran OTU assigned to Sepsis flavimana, the Thysanoptera OTUs were assigned to the genus Haplothrips, and the Trombidiformes OTUs formed part of the Eriophyidae Arachnid family. One OTU could only be identified as Arthropoda. Thysanoptera and Trombidiformes were observed in all sample groups (grass species). The most abundant group was represented by the Eriophyidae mites, which was observed in all samples (RRA = 57.1%—72.6%). In the normalized dataset, the Coleopteran and Dipteran OTUs were only observed in one sample each (Coleoptera—T. triandra RRA = 2.4%; Diptera—P. coloratum RRA = 25%).Fig. 2 Relative read abundance (RRA) of the arthropod families and orders identified from the inflorescence surfaces of four grass species (Cymbopogon caesius, Themeda triandra, Panicum coloratum, Sporobolus fimbriatus). The dataset was rarefied to compensate for uneven sampling. The colour version of the image is available in the online version. (Color figure online)

The Ascomycota OTUs (n = 14) were assigned to four classes (Dothideomycetes, Eurotiomycetes, Leotiomycetes and Sordariomycetes). The two Eurotiomycetes OTUs were assigned to the genus Penicillium, with the three Leotiomycetes assigned to the genus Leohumicola and two of these were further identified as L. cerrucosa. The three Dothideomycetes OTUs and one of the Sordariomycetes OTUs only assigned to class level, with the other Sordariomycetes OTU assigned to the family Nectriaceae. The most abundant classes were Dothideomycetes and Eurotiomycetes, which were observed in all four grass species groups. It was observed that Eurotiomycetes, and specifically Penicillium, had the highest RRA in the C. caesius samples, and an unknown taxon of Dothideomycetes were more dominant in the T. triandra and S. fimbriatus samples (Fig. 3; Supplementary Figure S2). Three classes of Basidiomycota were observed, with OTUs assigned to Agaricomycetes, Malasseziomycetes and Tremellomycetes. Two Agaricomycetes OTUs were identified to genus level as Pleurotus sp., with the Malasseziomycetes were assigned to the genus Malassezia sp. A single Oomycota OTU was assigned to the family Albuginaceae.Fig. 3 The relative read abundance (RRA) estimates for the fungal classes identified from the inflorescence of four grass species (Cymbopogon caesius, Panicum coloratum, Sporobolus fimbriatus, Themeda triandra). The dataset was rarefied to compensate for uneven sampling, with four OTUs removed. The colour version of the image is available in the online version. (Color figure online)

Diversity

The alpha diversities per grass species sampled can be observed in Fig. 4. Although no significant differences were seen between the grass species following the Kruskal–Wallis test, one can observe a general trend in the data. The alpha diversities for the P. coloratum samples were consistently lower in both datasets compared to the other grass species. The median values for the C. caesius and T. triandra samples were generally higher than for the open panicle grass species. The Generalized Unifrac measures for beta diversity showed no significant differences between grass species sampled (p-value > 0.05). The NMDS plot showed a clear overlap between all four grass species groups for both datasets (Supplementary Figure S3).Fig. 4 Alpha diversity indices (Observed Richness, Chao1, Shannon’s diversity index and Simpson’s diversity index) for the a Arthropoda and b Fungi datasets. The estimates were calculated from rarefied datasets. The groups represent the grass species from which the samples were taken (Cymbopogon caesius—red; Themeda triandra—green; Sporobolus fimbriatus—blue; Panicum coloratum—purple). The colour version of the image is available in the online version. (Color figure online)

Discussion

This study assessed the use of grass inflorescence for biodiversity monitoring within an urban grassland environment. The rarefaction curves suggest that additional sampling is required to capture a more significant portion of the biodiversity. The number of raw sequences obtained was also lower than expected. An explanation for this observation could be two-fold: the low amount of surface DNA on the grass inflorescence or the PCR biases of the chosen marker and PCR primers. The DNA concentrations could be improved by increasing the amount of extraction material used, by increasing the number of samples collected per site and performing DNA extraction replicates. The number of replicate samples needed will have to be assessed in a further investigation. The subsequent pooling of the replicate extracts could increase the amount of environmental DNA for PCR amplification. Increasing the number of replicate PCR reactions could further improve the detection of low-copy number DNA, and using shorter target loci (< 300bp) to better detect degraded DNA could additionally improve detection rates [13]. Gamonal Gomez et al. [13] further suggested using taxon-specific primers to improve targeted species detection and decrease the number of non-target taxa, such as the large number of fungal sequences observed in the current study. High abundances of fungal and bacterial taxa were reported by Lopes et al. [45] using the same COI primer set as in the current study. The occurrence of such high levels of microorganisms was deemed expected due to the nature of the sample material—faecal pellets. Ritter et al. [46] similarly reported that the majority of the observed COI sequence data generated from soil, plant and bulk insect samples were assigned to the fungal phyla Ascomycota and Basidiomycota. These authors targeted the same COI sequence region as in the current study but using modified primer sequences. Future studies should consider the broad range of taxa amplifiable from these primer sets and select a combination of primers and markers to improve the possible detections observed in line with the study objectives. Shorter Arthropoda specific primers, targeting COI [157 bp; [47] or 16S rRNA [157 bp; [48], would provide targeted results. Metagenomic shotgun sequencing of the eDNA extracts could be an alternative if funding is available, using state of the art sequencers such as the Illumina Novaseq or Oxford Nanopore PromethION systems. This metagenomic method can be performed without PCR amplification, thereby removing the PCR and primer bias concerns. The generated data would be based on the total DNA composition of the sample and not just a fraction like in a targeted approach and could provide composition data on the total ecosystem biodiversity ranging from viruses to bacteria to eukaryotes [49, 50]. A shortcoming of the current study design was identified after data generation and analysis were completed, which is the lack of environmental negative controls to account for the possible deposition of airborne eDNA on the plant surfaces. It should additionally be noted that DNA extraction blanks were not carried through to sequencing. The results reported here should, therefore, be considered with caution.

Despite the low sequence numbers and the small number of OTUs, several known grass-associated taxa were identified. Trombidiformes mites from the family Eriophyidae were dominant on all grass species. The members from Eriophyidae are known to occur on various species of grasses worldwide [51, 52]. These mites are obligate plant parasites, with several species causing damage to agricultural and ornamental plant species [53, 54]. Eriophyid mites have also been shown to serve as a valid biological control of invasive weeds, as seen in the case of the release of Aceria malherbae in South Africa to control the weed Convolvulus arvensis [55]. The second most abundant Arthropoda order was identified as Thysanoptera, exclusively represented by the genus Haplothrips (Phlaeothripidae), and was also observed on all grass species. The largest abundances were observed for the grasses C. caesius and S. fimbriatus. Members of the genus Haplothrips are known to live in the inflorescence of several plant taxa in South Africa, including grasses [56]. The diet of Haplothrips species include the eggs of spider mites (Tetranychidae, Trombidiformes) and eriophyid mites (Eriophyidae, Trombidiformes), as well as plants such as grasses [57, 58]. Thysanoptera is regularly reported in similar studies using plant inflorescence as eDNA source [12, 59–61]. An unidentified Coleopteran OTU was observed at low abundances for the assessed grass species. Members of the tribe Alticini are known phytophagous insects, with several species from the genera Stegnaspea and Chaetocnema known to be associated with grasses [62, 63]. Some members of the family Chrysomelidae have also been identified as possible biological control agents [64]. The Arthropoda taxa identified in the current study were also identified by Morrison et al. [65] while surveying for possible biocontrol candidates against Kenyan buffelgrass (Cenchrus ciliaris). Although RRA estimates have been suggested as an accurate method to view sample composition during metabarcoding studies, biases still exist [66]. The sole Dipteran OTU was identified as Sepsis flavimana. The distribution of this fly species is, however, restricted to the northern hemisphere [67]. This OTU is probably a member of the Sepsis genus, and closely related to S. flavimana. There are 43 Sepsis species known from the Afrotropical Region, with S. stenocalyptrata and S. thorcica previously observed in South Africa [68]. Sepsidae is a small fly family, showing morphological uniformity, mainly associated with animal dung [68; and references therein]. Some Sepsidae species have also been identified as possible pollinators [69]. The high abundances of Eriophyidae and Phlaeothripidae observed could be linked to skewed sampling. It is possible that invertebrate specimens were missed during the inflorescence inspection before DNA extraction due to the minute size of these arthropods. Thomsen and Sigsgaard [12] similarly suggested that the abundance of thrips observed in their study could be linked to the accidental inclusion of insect eggs, larvae or minute adult insects. Accidentally, including invertebrates in the extraction substrate would skew the amount of DNA available for PCR amplification, resulting in sequence read abundance values biased toward the included invertebrate taxa.

In the current study, a large number of COI sequences were identified as fungi. The phylum Ascomycota dominated the fungal dataset in the present study, and this supports previous reports of grass fungal diversity [70–72]. Reports on the fungal community composition for grass foliar tissues are globally highly diverse. For the current study, the fungal class Dothideomycetes was observed in all grass taxa, with low RRA in C. caesius samples, and Eurotiomycetes were more abundant in C. caesius and P. coloratum. Dothideomycete taxa were reported by Chen et al. [73] to have the greatest abundance on asymptomatic leaves of the South and North American native, Sporobolus indicus, similar to what was observed for S. fimbriatus in the current study. Dothideomycetes species such as the members of the genus Cladosporium is assumed to be a host-generalist and has been identified on leaf and stem tissues from several grass taxa worldwide [74–76]. Penicillium sp. (Eurotiomycetes) are well-known contaminants of foods such as grains and spices [77, 78], and the occurrence of this taxon on all grass species sampled here is unsurprising. High RRA values were observed for Penicillium in the Cymbopogon caesius samples included in the current study. This fungal genus has previously been reported as a highly abundant fungal taxon on another African Cymbopogon species, namely C. schoenanthus, from a study in Egypt [77]. The root endophytic genus Leohumicola (Ascomycota) was observed in higher abundances for the false panicle compared to the open panicle grasses. Leohumicola is regularly observed in grassland soils, and frequently associated with the grass rhizosphere [79, 80]. The Basidiomycete Malassezia is the sole genus of the class Malasseziomycetes, which is known to naturally occur on the skin surface of many animal species, including humans [81]. This could be either a sign of human mediated contamination during the field or laboratory work, or this could be as a results of carry over from fauna found in the area. It should be noted that these fungal observations are based on limited data generated from COI sequencing. Further investigations using fungi-specific genetic markers (e.g. ITS2) would provide more accurate fungal community data of these grass species. Including negative field control samples should also be implemented, as airborne fungal spores could also contribute to the DNA found on plant surfaces, thus increasing the chances of false positives.

The higher levels of arthropod and fungal alpha diversity indices observed for the C. caesius and T. triandra samples could be explained by the complex inflorescence structures of these grasses. The complex hairy inflorescence and large spikelets of C. caesius and T. triandra could potentially capture environmental DNA more effectively than the open panicle inflorescence and small spikelets of S. fimbriatus and P. coloratum [23]. Inflorescence size has previously been reported as a significant factor in the level of diversity detected using eDNA metabarcoding. Thomsen and Sigsgaard [12] similarly reported higher insect diversity levels from flowers with larger surface areas while assessing arthropod diversity using eDNA metabarcoding of various flower samples collected from dry grassland habitats in Denmark. More recently, while studying plant-pollinator interaction in western Australia, Newton et al. [61] also observed higher taxon detection rates for samples collected from plant species with large inflorescence. Grass endophytic fungi are known to have a broad host range, with some being generalists and others being host specifics based on host organ architecture [82]. The inflorescence of the false panicle grasses could also provide a suitable environment to support a higher fungal diversity, due to a potentially larger surface area for colonising the compound inflorescence structure with large spikelets, spathes and spatheoles. A further in-depth study of the fungal communities of these grass species could provide more details on the core and unique fungal taxa for these grasses.

Half of the taxonomic identifications of the Arthropoda OTUs were at higher taxonomic levels, with the lowest assignments to genus level for Diptera and Thysanoptera. The need for an in-depth reference database is crucial for accurate taxonomic identifications via eDNA metabarcoding [11]. The lack of lower taxonomic identifications for a large portion of the data is a strong indication of missing data in the reference database used, such reduced resolution is regularly reported in similar studies [61], and it is suggested that custom reference databases of local taxa should be constructed to improve genetic identifications [59]. A recent review did highlight the under representation of South African insect sequences in the BOLD database [33]. It is therefore important for South African researchers to address this shortcoming, which will improve the efficacy of eDNA metabarcoding during biomonitoring projects.

Conclusion

The potential of using grass inflorescence as a source of environmental DNA to study metazoan and fungal biodiversity associated with different grass species has been highlighted in the current study. This study provides some new insights into the arthropod and fungal communities associated with four well-known grass species from central South Africa. However, the results should be considered with caution as extraction and PCR blanks were not carried through to sequencing. Negative field controls were also not included to account for the possibility of airborne eDNA contributing to the arthropod and fungal assemblages detected from these plant surfaces. Collecting additional replicates per grass species and increasing the DNA extraction effort could potentially further improve the HTS detection rates from grass inflorescence. It is additionally suggested that metabarcoding markers producing smaller amplicons with taxon-specific primers could provide improved HTS data during future studies of the biodiversity associated with grass species. If funding is available, one could also consider using metagenomic shotgun sequencing of eDNA to assess the total biodiversity of the samples. Such information could shine light on the occurrence of possible plant pathogens and parasites, as well as their associated predator species. Such data could also provide information on the presence of invasive species. Insect-mediated pollination does occur in some grass species, and a more in-depth study of arthropod diversity could identify important pollinator species. Further studies on grass-insect interactions and grass fungal diversity in South African grasslands can assist in future conservation management planning of these habitats. Increased effort should be placed on the improvement of local arthropod sequence representation on public reference databases such as BOLD and GenBank, to ensure accurate species identification in further South African studies.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.Supplementary file1 (PDF 418 KB)

Supplementary file2 (XLSX 11 KB)

Acknowledgements

I want to acknowledge the University of the Free State and the University of Fort Hare for providing the necessary resources and time to do this research. I would also like to acknowledge Kayleigh Coetzer for proofreading the manuscript. Funding was provided by the National Research Foundation (NRF) via an Incentive Funding for Rated Researchers (IFRR) grant.

Author contributions

Sole author—WGC was responsible for all study aspects.

Funding

Open access funding provided by University of Fort Hare. Funding was provided by the National Research Foundation (NRF) via an Incentive Funding for Rated Researchers (IFRR) grant.

Data availability

All raw sequences are stored under BioProject PRJNA935099 (Assession numbers SAMN33297822-SAMN33297837) on the NCBI GenBank database.

Declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

It is not applicable.

Consent to participate

It is not applicable.

Consent for publication

It is not applicable.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. von der Heyden S Environmental DNA surveys of African biodiversity: state of knowledge, challenges, and opportunities Environ DNA 2023 5 12 17 10.1002/edn3.363
von der Heyden S (2023) Environmental DNA surveys of African biodiversity: state of knowledge, challenges, and opportunities. Environ DNA 5:12–17. 10.1002/edn3.36310.1002/edn3.363
2. Gous A Swanevelder DZ Eardley CD Willows-Munro S Plant–pollinator interactions over time: pollen metabarcoding from bees in a historic collection Evol Appl 2019 12 187 197 10.1111/eva.12707 30697333
Gous A, Swanevelder DZ, Eardley CD, Willows-Munro S (2019) Plant–pollinator interactions over time: pollen metabarcoding from bees in a historic collection. Evol Appl 12:187–19730697333 10.1111/eva.12707
3. Kartzinel TR Chen PA Coverdale TC Erickson DL Kress WJ Kuzmina ML DNA metabarcoding illuminates dietary niche partitioning by African large herbivores Proc Natl Acad Sci 2015 112 8019 8024 10.1073/pnas.1503283112 26034267
Kartzinel TR, Chen PA, Coverdale TC, Erickson DL, Kress WJ, Kuzmina ML et al (2015) DNA metabarcoding illuminates dietary niche partitioning by African large herbivores. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:8019–802426034267 10.1073/pnas.1503283112
4. Marshall NT Stepien CA Invasion genetics from eDNA and thousands of larvae: a targeted metabarcoding assay that distinguishes species and population variation of zebra and quagga mussels Ecol Evol 2019 9 3515 3538 10.1002/ece3.4985 30988898
Marshall NT, Stepien CA (2019) Invasion genetics from eDNA and thousands of larvae: a targeted metabarcoding assay that distinguishes species and population variation of zebra and quagga mussels. Ecol Evol 9:3515–353830988898 10.1002/ece3.4985
5. Mena JL Yagui H Tejeda V Bonifaz E Bellemain E Valentini A Environmental DNA metabarcoding as a useful tool for evaluating terrestrial mammal diversity in tropical forests Ecol Appl 2021 31 e02335 10.1002/eap.2335 33780592
Mena JL, Yagui H, Tejeda V, Bonifaz E, Bellemain E, Valentini A et al (2021) Environmental DNA metabarcoding as a useful tool for evaluating terrestrial mammal diversity in tropical forests. Ecol Appl 31:e0233533780592 10.1002/eap.2335
6. Fahner NA Shokralla S Baird DJ Hajibabaei M Large-scale monitoring of plants through environmental DNA metabarcoding of soil: recovery, resolution, and annotation of four DNA markers PLoS ONE 2016 11 e0157505 10.1371/journal.pone.0157505 27310720
Fahner NA, Shokralla S, Baird DJ, Hajibabaei M (2016) Large-scale monitoring of plants through environmental DNA metabarcoding of soil: recovery, resolution, and annotation of four DNA markers. PLoS ONE 11:e015750527310720 10.1371/journal.pone.0157505
7. Sahu A Kumar N Pal Singh C Singh M Environmental DNA (eDNA): powerful technique for biodiversity conservation J Nat Conserv 2023 71 126325 10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126325
Sahu A, Kumar N, Pal Singh C, Singh M (2023) Environmental DNA (eDNA): powerful technique for biodiversity conservation. J Nat Conserv 71:126325. 10.1016/j.jnc.2022.12632510.1016/j.jnc.2022.126325
8. van der Heyde M Bunce M Wardell-Johnson G Fernandes K White NE Nevill P Testing multiple substrates for terrestrial biodiversity monitoring using environmental DNA metabarcoding Mol Ecol Resour 2020 20 732 745 10.1111/1755-0998.13148
van der Heyde M, Bunce M, Wardell-Johnson G, Fernandes K, White NE, Nevill P (2020) Testing multiple substrates for terrestrial biodiversity monitoring using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Mol Ecol Resour 20:732–74510.1111/1755-0998.13148
9. Nørgaard L Olesen CR Trøjelsgaard K Pertoldi C Nielsen JL Taberlet P eDNA metabarcoding for biodiversity assessment, generalist predators as sampling assistants Sci Rep 2021 11 1 12 33414495
Nørgaard L, Olesen CR, Trøjelsgaard K, Pertoldi C, Nielsen JL, Taberlet P et al (2021) eDNA metabarcoding for biodiversity assessment, generalist predators as sampling assistants. Sci Rep 11:1–1233414495
10. Johnson MD Barnes MA Garrett NR Clare EL Answers blowing in the wind: Detection of birds, mammals, and amphibians with airborne environmental DNA in a natural environment over a yearlong survey Environ DNA 2023 5 375 387 10.1002/edn3.388
Johnson MD, Barnes MA, Garrett NR, Clare EL (2023) Answers blowing in the wind: Detection of birds, mammals, and amphibians with airborne environmental DNA in a natural environment over a yearlong survey. Environ DNA 5:375–387. 10.1002/edn3.38810.1002/edn3.388
11. Banerjee P Stewart KA Antognazza CM Bunholi IV Deiner K Barnes MA Plant–animal interactions in the era of environmental DNA (eDNA)—a review Environ DNA 2022 4 987 999 10.1002/edn3.308
Banerjee P, Stewart KA, Antognazza CM, Bunholi IV, Deiner K, Barnes MA et al (2022) Plant–animal interactions in the era of environmental DNA (eDNA)—a review. Environ DNA 4:987–999. 10.1002/edn3.30810.1002/edn3.308
12. Thomsen PF Sigsgaard EE Environmental DNA metabarcoding of wild flowers reveals diverse communities of terrestrial arthropods Ecol Evol 2019 9 1665 1679 10.1002/ece3.4809 30847063
Thomsen PF, Sigsgaard EE (2019) Environmental DNA metabarcoding of wild flowers reveals diverse communities of terrestrial arthropods. Ecol Evol 9:1665–167930847063 10.1002/ece3.4809
13. Gamonal Gomez N Sørensen DH Chua PYS Sigsgaard L Assessing flower-visiting arthropod diversity in apple orchards through metabarcoding of environmental DNA from flowers and visual census Environ DNA 2023 5 117 131 10.1002/edn3.362
Gamonal Gomez N, Sørensen DH, Chua PYS, Sigsgaard L (2023) Assessing flower-visiting arthropod diversity in apple orchards through metabarcoding of environmental DNA from flowers and visual census. Environ DNA 5:117–131. 10.1002/edn3.36210.1002/edn3.362
14. Monge O Dumas D Baus I Environmental DNA from avian residual saliva in fruits and its potential uses in population genetics Conserv Genet Resour 2020 12 131 139 10.1007/s12686-018-1074-4
Monge O, Dumas D, Baus I (2020) Environmental DNA from avian residual saliva in fruits and its potential uses in population genetics. Conserv Genet Resour 12:131–139. 10.1007/s12686-018-1074-410.1007/s12686-018-1074-4
15. Valentin RE Fonseca DM Gable S Kyle KE Hamilton GC Nielsen AL Moving eDNA surveys onto land: strategies for active eDNA aggregation to detect invasive forest insects Mol Ecol Resour 2020 20 746 755 10.1111/1755-0998.13151
Valentin RE, Fonseca DM, Gable S, Kyle KE, Hamilton GC, Nielsen AL et al (2020) Moving eDNA surveys onto land: strategies for active eDNA aggregation to detect invasive forest insects. Mol Ecol Resour 20:746–75510.1111/1755-0998.13151
16. Petermann JS Buzhdygan OY Grassland biodiversity Curr Biol 2021 31 R1195 R1201 10.1016/j.cub.2021.06.060 34637731
Petermann JS, Buzhdygan OY (2021) Grassland biodiversity. Curr Biol 31:R1195–R120134637731 10.1016/j.cub.2021.06.060
17. Egoh BN Reyers B Rouget M Richardson DM Identifying priority areas for ecosystem service management in South African grasslands J Environ Manag 2011 92 1642 1650 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.01.019
Egoh BN, Reyers B, Rouget M, Richardson DM (2011) Identifying priority areas for ecosystem service management in South African grasslands. J Environ Manag 92:1642–1650. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.01.01910.1016/j.jenvman.2011.01.019
18. Bengtsson J Bullock JM Egoh B Everson C Everson T O'Connor T Grasslands—more important for ecosystem services than you might think Ecosphere 2019 10 e02582 10.1002/ecs2.2582
Bengtsson J, Bullock JM, Egoh B, Everson C, Everson T, O’Connor T et al (2019) Grasslands—more important for ecosystem services than you might think. Ecosphere 10:e02582. 10.1002/ecs2.258210.1002/ecs2.2582
19. Mucina L Rutherford MC The Vegetation of South Africa Lesotho and Swaziland 2006 Pretoria South African National Biodiversity Institute
Mucina L, Rutherford MC (2006) The Vegetation of South Africa Lesotho and Swaziland. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria
20. Neke KS Du Plessis MA The threat of transformation: quantifying the vulnerability of grasslands in South Africa Conserv Biol 2004 18 466 477 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00157.x
Neke KS, Du Plessis MA (2004) The threat of transformation: quantifying the vulnerability of grasslands in South Africa. Conserv Biol 18:466–477. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00157.x10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00157.x
21. Carbutt C Kirkman K Ecological grassland restoration—a South African perspective Land 2022 11 575 10.3390/land11040575
Carbutt C, Kirkman K (2022) Ecological grassland restoration—a South African perspective. Land 11:57510.3390/land11040575
22. Saunders ME Insect pollinators collect pollen from wind-pollinated plants: implications for pollination ecology and sustainable agriculture Insect Conserv Divers 2018 11 13 31 10.1111/icad.12243
Saunders ME (2018) Insect pollinators collect pollen from wind-pollinated plants: implications for pollination ecology and sustainable agriculture. Insect Conserv Divers 11:13–3110.1111/icad.12243
23. Fish L Mashau AC Moeaha MJ Nembudani MT Identification guide to southern African grasses: an identification manual with keys, descriptions and distributions 2015 Cape Town South African National Biodiversity Institute
Fish L, Mashau AC, Moeaha MJ, Nembudani MT (2015) Identification guide to southern African grasses: an identification manual with keys, descriptions and distributions. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Cape Town
24. Google Maps (2022) Map of University of the Free State sample sites [Satellite Map]. https://maps.app.goo.gl/YQMB8bWned4bhSSZ9. Accessed 5 Sept 2022
25. Rennstam Rubbmark O Sint D Horngacher N Traugott M A broadly applicable COI primer pair and an efficient single-tube amplicon library preparation protocol for metabarcoding Ecol Evol 2018 8 12335 12350 10.1002/ece3.4520 30619549
Rennstam Rubbmark O, Sint D, Horngacher N, Traugott M (2018) A broadly applicable COI primer pair and an efficient single-tube amplicon library preparation protocol for metabarcoding. Ecol Evol 8:12335–12350. 10.1002/ece3.452030619549 10.1002/ece3.4520
26. Geller J Meyer C Parker M Hawk H Redesign of PCR primers for mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I for marine invertebrates and application in all-taxa biotic surveys Mol Ecol Resour 2013 13 851 861 10.1111/1755-0998.12138 23848937
Geller J, Meyer C, Parker M, Hawk H (2013) Redesign of PCR primers for mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I for marine invertebrates and application in all-taxa biotic surveys. Mol Ecol Resour 13:851–86123848937 10.1111/1755-0998.12138
27. Bolyen E Rideout JR Dillon MR Bokulich NA Abnet CC Al-Ghalith GA Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2 Nat Biotechnol 2019 37 852 857 10.1038/s41587-019-0209-9 31341288
Bolyen E, Rideout JR, Dillon MR, Bokulich NA, Abnet CC, Al-Ghalith GA et al (2019) Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat Biotechnol 37:852–857. 10.1038/s41587-019-0209-931341288 10.1038/s41587-019-0209-9
28. Martin M Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads EMBnet journal 2011 17 10 12 10.14806/ej.17.1.200
Martin M (2011) Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet journal 17:10–1210.14806/ej.17.1.200
29. Callahan BJ McMurdie PJ Rosen MJ Han AW Johnson AJA Holmes SP DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data Nat Methods 2016 13 581 583 10.1038/nmeth.3869 27214047
Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJA, Holmes SP (2016) DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods 13:581–58327214047 10.1038/nmeth.3869
30. Frøslev TG Kjøller R Bruun HH Ejrnæs R Brunbjerg AK Pietroni C Algorithm for post-clustering curation of DNA amplicon data yields reliable biodiversity estimates Nat Commun 2017 8 1 11 10.1038/s41467-017-01312-x 28232747
Frøslev TG, Kjøller R, Bruun HH, Ejrnæs R, Brunbjerg AK, Pietroni C et al (2017) Algorithm for post-clustering curation of DNA amplicon data yields reliable biodiversity estimates. Nat Commun 8:1–1128232747 10.1038/s41467-017-01312-x
31. Leray M Knowlton N Machida RJ MIDORI2: A collection of quality controlled, preformatted, and regularly updated reference databases for taxonomic assignment of eukaryotic mitochondrial sequences Environ DNA 2022 4 894 907 10.1002/edn3.303
Leray M, Knowlton N, Machida RJ (2022) MIDORI2: A collection of quality controlled, preformatted, and regularly updated reference databases for taxonomic assignment of eukaryotic mitochondrial sequences. Environ DNA 4:894–907. 10.1002/edn3.30310.1002/edn3.303
32. Mugnai F Costantini F Chenuil A Leduc M Gutiérrez Ortega JM Meglécz E Be positive: customized reference databases and new, local barcodes balance false taxonomic assignments in metabarcoding studies PeerJ 2023 11 e14616 10.7717/peerj.14616 36643652
Mugnai F, Costantini F, Chenuil A, Leduc M, Gutiérrez Ortega JM, Meglécz E (2023) Be positive: customized reference databases and new, local barcodes balance false taxonomic assignments in metabarcoding studies. PeerJ 11:e14616. 10.7717/peerj.1461636643652 10.7717/peerj.14616
33. Myburgh M-MM Thabang Madisha M Coetzer WG South Africa’s contribution of insect records on the BOLD system Mol Biol Rep 2021 48 8211 8220 10.1007/s11033-021-06822-y 34652616
Myburgh M-MM, Thabang Madisha M, Coetzer WG (2021) South Africa’s contribution of insect records on the BOLD system. Mol Biol Rep 48:8211–822034652616 10.1007/s11033-021-06822-y
34. Dixon P VEGAN, a package of R functions for community ecology J Veg Sci 2003 14 927 930 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2003.tb02228.x
Dixon P (2003) VEGAN, a package of R functions for community ecology. J Veg Sci 14:927–930. 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2003.tb02228.x10.1111/j.1654-1103.2003.tb02228.x
35. R Core Team R: a language and environment for statistical computing 2018 Vienna R Foundation for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2018) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
36. McMurdie PJ Holmes S phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data PLoS ONE 2013 8 e61217 10.1371/journal.pone.0061217 23630581
McMurdie PJ, Holmes S (2013) phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE 8:e6121723630581 10.1371/journal.pone.0061217
37. Wickham H ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis 2016 Berlin Springer
Wickham H (2016) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer, Berlin
38. DeSantis TZ Hugenholtz P Larsen N Rojas M Brodie EL Keller K Greengenes, a chimera-checked 16S rRNA gene database and workbench compatible with ARB Appl Environ Microbiol 2006 72 5069 5072 10.1128/AEM.03006-05 16820507
DeSantis TZ, Hugenholtz P, Larsen N, Rojas M, Brodie EL, Keller K et al (2006) Greengenes, a chimera-checked 16S rRNA gene database and workbench compatible with ARB. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:5069–507216820507 10.1128/AEM.03006-05
39. Chao A Nonparametric estimation of the number of classes in a population Scand J Stat 1984 1 265 270
Chao A (1984) Nonparametric estimation of the number of classes in a population. Scand J Stat 1:265–270
40. Shannon CE Weaver W (1949) The mathematical theory of communication 1949 Champaign University of Illonois Press
Shannon CE (1949) Weaver W (1949) The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illonois Press, Champaign
41. Simpson EH Measurement of diversity Nature 1949 163 688 10.1038/163688a0
Simpson EH (1949) Measurement of diversity. Nature 163:68810.1038/163688a0
42. Kruskal WH Wallis WA Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis J Am Stat Assoc 1952 47 583 621 10.1080/01621459.1952.10483441
Kruskal WH, Wallis WA (1952) Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 47:583–621. 10.1080/01621459.1952.1048344110.1080/01621459.1952.10483441
43. Lagkouvardos I Fischer S Kumar N Clavel T Rhea: a transparent and modular R pipeline for microbial profiling based on 16S rRNA gene amplicons PeerJ 2017 5 e2836 10.7717/peerj.2836 28097056
Lagkouvardos I, Fischer S, Kumar N, Clavel T (2017) Rhea: a transparent and modular R pipeline for microbial profiling based on 16S rRNA gene amplicons. PeerJ 5:e2836. 10.7717/peerj.283628097056 10.7717/peerj.2836
44. Chen J Bittinger K Charlson ES Hoffmann C Lewis J Wu GD Associating microbiome composition with environmental covariates using generalized UniFrac distances Bioinformatics 2012 28 2106 2113 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts342 22711789
Chen J, Bittinger K, Charlson ES, Hoffmann C, Lewis J, Wu GD et al (2012) Associating microbiome composition with environmental covariates using generalized UniFrac distances. Bioinformatics 28:2106–211322711789 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts342
45. Lopes F Rossini M Losacco F Montanaro G Gunter N Tarasov S Metagenomics reveals that dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) broadly feed on reptile dung. Did they also feed on that of dinosaurs? Front Ecol Evol 2023 10.3389/fevo.2023.1132729
Lopes F, Rossini M, Losacco F, Montanaro G, Gunter N, Tarasov S (2023) Metagenomics reveals that dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) broadly feed on reptile dung. Did they also feed on that of dinosaurs? Front Ecol Evol. 10.3389/fevo.2023.113272910.3389/fevo.2023.1132729
46. Ritter CD Faurby S Bennett DJ Naka LN ter Steege H Zizka A The pitfalls of biodiversity proxies: differences in richness patterns of birds, trees and understudied diversity across Amazonia Sci Rep 2019 9 19205 10.1038/s41598-019-55490-3 31844092
Ritter CD, Faurby S, Bennett DJ, Naka LN, ter Steege H, Zizka A et al (2019) The pitfalls of biodiversity proxies: differences in richness patterns of birds, trees and understudied diversity across Amazonia. Sci Rep 9:19205. 10.1038/s41598-019-55490-331844092 10.1038/s41598-019-55490-3
47. Zeale MRK Butlin RK Barker GLA Lees DC Jones G Taxon-specific PCR for DNA barcoding arthropod prey in bat faeces Mol Ecol Resour 2011 11 236 244 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02920.x 21429129
Zeale MRK, Butlin RK, Barker GLA, Lees DC, Jones G (2011) Taxon-specific PCR for DNA barcoding arthropod prey in bat faeces. Mol Ecol Resour 11:236–244. 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02920.x21429129 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02920.x
48. Elbrecht V Taberlet P Dejean T Valentini A Usseglio-Polatera P Beisel J-N Testing the potential of a ribosomal 16S marker for DNA metabarcoding of insects PeerJ 2016 4 e1966 10.7717/peerj.1966 27114891
Elbrecht V, Taberlet P, Dejean T, Valentini A, Usseglio-Polatera P, Beisel J-N et al (2016) Testing the potential of a ribosomal 16S marker for DNA metabarcoding of insects. PeerJ 4:e1966. 10.7717/peerj.196627114891 10.7717/peerj.1966
49. Cowart DA Murphy KR Cheng CHC Metagenomic sequencing of environmental DNA reveals marine faunal assemblages from the West Antarctic Peninsula Mar Genom 2018 37 148 160 10.1016/j.margen.2017.11.003
Cowart DA, Murphy KR, Cheng CHC (2018) Metagenomic sequencing of environmental DNA reveals marine faunal assemblages from the West Antarctic Peninsula. Mar Genom 37:148–160. 10.1016/j.margen.2017.11.00310.1016/j.margen.2017.11.003
50. Gabrielli M Dai Z Delafont V Timmers PHA van der Wielen PWJJ Antonelli M Identifying eukaryotes and factors influencing their biogeography in drinking water metagenomes Environ Sci Technol 2023 57 3645 3660 10.1021/acs.est.2c09010 36827617
Gabrielli M, Dai Z, Delafont V, Timmers PHA, van der Wielen PWJJ, Antonelli M et al (2023) Identifying eukaryotes and factors influencing their biogeography in drinking water metagenomes. Environ Sci Technol 57:3645–3660. 10.1021/acs.est.2c0901036827617 10.1021/acs.est.2c09010
51. Chetverikov PE Amrine JW Kiss E Kontschán J Ripka G Reassignment of Rhyncaphytoptus longipalpis Xue et Hong, 2005 (Diptilomiopidae) to Bambusacarus n. gen. (Eriophyidae) and remarks on shape of oral stylet and orientation of pharynx in Eriophyoidea (Acari: Acariformes) Syst Appl Acarol 2020 25 759 771
Chetverikov PE, Amrine JW, Kiss E, Kontschán J, Ripka G (2020) Reassignment of Rhyncaphytoptus longipalpis Xue et Hong, 2005 (Diptilomiopidae) to Bambusacarus n. gen. (Eriophyidae) and remarks on shape of oral stylet and orientation of pharynx in Eriophyoidea (Acari: Acariformes). Syst Appl Acarol 25:759–771
52. Seeman OD Loch DS McMaugh PE Redescription of Dolichotetranychus australianus (Trombidiformes: Tenuipalpidae), a pest of bermudagrass Cynodon dactylon (Poaceae) Int J Acarology 2016 42 193 205 10.1080/01647954.2016.1153143
Seeman OD, Loch DS, McMaugh PE (2016) Redescription of Dolichotetranychus australianus (Trombidiformes: Tenuipalpidae), a pest of bermudagrass Cynodon dactylon (Poaceae). Int J Acarology 42:193–20510.1080/01647954.2016.1153143
53. Ngubane-Ndhlovu N Ochoa R Ueckermann E Kapp C New records of Eriophyidae and Tenuipalpidae mites (Acari: Prostigmata) on bougainvillea plants in South Africa Acarologia 2022 62 332 339 10.24349/d7co-7t53
Ngubane-Ndhlovu N, Ochoa R, Ueckermann E, Kapp C (2022) New records of Eriophyidae and Tenuipalpidae mites (Acari: Prostigmata) on bougainvillea plants in South Africa. Acarologia 62:332–339. 10.24349/d7co-7t5310.24349/d7co-7t53
54. Smith Meyer M Craemer C Mites (Arachnida: Acari) as crop pests in southern Africa: an overview African Plant Prot 1999 5 37 51
Smith Meyer M, Craemer C (1999) Mites (Arachnida: Acari) as crop pests in southern Africa: an overview. African Plant Prot 5:37–51
55. Marini F Weyl P Vidović B Petanović R Littlefield J Simoni S Eriophyid mites in classical biological control of weeds: progress and challenges Insects 2021 12 513 10.3390/insects12060513 34206023
Marini F, Weyl P, Vidović B, Petanović R, Littlefield J, Simoni S et al (2021) Eriophyid mites in classical biological control of weeds: progress and challenges. Insects 12:51334206023 10.3390/insects12060513
56. Faure J South African Thysanoptera—4 J Entomol Soc South Afr 1955 18 208 234
Faure J (1955) South African Thysanoptera—4. J Entomol Soc South Afr 18:208–234
57. Kalaisekar A Padmaja PG Bhagwat VR Patil JV Kalaisekar A Padmaja PG Bhagwat VR Patil JV Systematics and taxonomy Insect pests of millets: academic press 2017 Amsterdam Elsevier 27 72
Kalaisekar A, Padmaja PG, Bhagwat VR, Patil JV (2017) Systematics and taxonomy. In: Kalaisekar A, Padmaja PG, Bhagwat VR, Patil JV (eds) Insect pests of millets: academic press. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 27–72
58. Hagen KS Mills NJ Gordh G Bellows TS Fisher TW McMurtry JA (1999) Terrestrial arthropod predators of insect and mite pests Handbook of biological control 1999 San Diego Academic Press 383 503
Hagen KS, Mills NJ, Gordh G (1999) McMurtry JA (1999) Terrestrial arthropod predators of insect and mite pests. In: Bellows TS, Fisher TW (eds) Handbook of biological control. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 383–503
59. Kestel JH Bateman PW Field DL White NE Lines R Nevill P eDNA metabarcoding of avocado flowers: ‘Hass’ it got potential to survey arthropods in food production systems? Mol Ecol Resour 2023 23 1540 1555 10.1111/1755-0998.13814 37237427
Kestel JH, Bateman PW, Field DL, White NE, Lines R, Nevill P (2023) eDNA metabarcoding of avocado flowers: ‘Hass’ it got potential to survey arthropods in food production systems? Mol Ecol Resour 23:1540–1555. 10.1111/1755-0998.1381437237427 10.1111/1755-0998.13814
60. Johnson MD Katz AD Davis MA Tetzlaff S Edlund D Tomczyk S Environmental DNA metabarcoding from flowers reveals arthropod pollinators, plant pests, parasites, and potential predator–prey interactions while revealing more arthropod diversity than camera traps Environ DNA 2023 5 551 569 10.1002/edn3.411
Johnson MD, Katz AD, Davis MA, Tetzlaff S, Edlund D, Tomczyk S et al (2023) Environmental DNA metabarcoding from flowers reveals arthropod pollinators, plant pests, parasites, and potential predator–prey interactions while revealing more arthropod diversity than camera traps. Environ DNA 5:551–569. 10.1002/edn3.41110.1002/edn3.411
61. Newton JP Bateman PW Heydenrych MJ Kestel JH Dixon KW Prendergast KS Monitoring the birds and the bees: environmental DNA metabarcoding of flowers detects plant–animal interactions Environ DNA 2023 5 488 502 10.1002/edn3.399
Newton JP, Bateman PW, Heydenrych MJ, Kestel JH, Dixon KW, Prendergast KS et al (2023) Monitoring the birds and the bees: environmental DNA metabarcoding of flowers detects plant–animal interactions. Environ DNA 5:488–502. 10.1002/edn3.39910.1002/edn3.399
62. D’Alessandro P Grobbelaar E Biondi M Revision of the genus Stegnaspea Baly with descriptions of five new species from southern Africa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Galerucinae: Alticini) Insect Syst Evol 2012 43 11 33 10.1163/187631212X626032
D’Alessandro P, Grobbelaar E, Biondi M (2012) Revision of the genus Stegnaspea Baly with descriptions of five new species from southern Africa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Galerucinae: Alticini). Insect Syst Evol 43:11–33. 10.1163/187631212X62603210.1163/187631212X626032
63. Biondi M Alessandro P Two new species of Chaetocnema Stephens from South Africa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Alticini) Fragm Entomol 2018 50 11 18 10.13133/2284-4880/279
Biondi M, Alessandro P (2018) Two new species of Chaetocnema Stephens from South Africa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Alticini). Fragm Entomol 50:11–18. 10.13133/2284-4880/27910.13133/2284-4880/279
64. Mawela KV Simelane DO Olckers T Life histories and host-range evaluation of two Chrysomelid beetles (Zygogramma spp.) released against Tithonia rotundifolia in South Africa Insects 2022 13 267 10.3390/insects13030267 35323565
Mawela KV, Simelane DO, Olckers T (2022) Life histories and host-range evaluation of two Chrysomelid beetles (Zygogramma spp.) released against Tithonia rotundifolia in South Africa. Insects 13:26735323565 10.3390/insects13030267
65. Morrison CR Plowes RM Ng'iru I Rhodes AC Martins DJ Gilbert LE Arthropod associates of Kenyan buffelgrass (Cenchrus ciliaris): a field survey for biological control candidates of a globally important invasive grass African Entomol 2023 10.17159/2254-8854/2023/a16178
Morrison CR, Plowes RM, Ng’iru I, Rhodes AC, Martins DJ, Gilbert LE (2023) Arthropod associates of Kenyan buffelgrass (Cenchrus ciliaris): a field survey for biological control candidates of a globally important invasive grass. African Entomol. 10.17159/2254-8854/2023/a1617810.17159/2254-8854/2023/a16178
66. Deagle BE Thomas AC McInnes JC Clarke LJ Vesterinen EJ Clare EL Counting with DNA in metabarcoding studies: how should we convert sequence reads to dietary data? Mol Ecol 2019 28 391 406 10.1111/mec.14734 29858539
Deagle BE, Thomas AC, McInnes JC, Clarke LJ, Vesterinen EJ, Clare EL et al (2019) Counting with DNA in metabarcoding studies: how should we convert sequence reads to dietary data? Mol Ecol 28:391–40629858539 10.1111/mec.14734
67. Pont AC Meier R The sepsidae (Diptera) of Europe 2002 Leiden Brill
Pont AC, Meier R (2002) The sepsidae (Diptera) of Europe. Brill, Leiden
68. Ozerov AL Kirk-Spriggs AH Sinclair BJ Sepsidae (Sepsid Flies or Ant-like Scavenger Flies) Suricata 8: manual of Afrotropical Diptera 2021 Pretoria South African Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) 1847 1859
Ozerov AL (2021) Sepsidae (Sepsid Flies or Ant-like Scavenger Flies). In: Kirk-Spriggs AH, Sinclair BJ (eds) Suricata 8: manual of Afrotropical Diptera. South African Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), Pretoria, pp 1847–1859
69. Ollerton J Johnson SD Cranmer L Kellie SAM The pollination ecology of an assemblage of grassland asclepiads in South Africa Ann Bot 2003 92 807 834 10.1093/aob/mcg206 14612378
Ollerton J, Johnson SD, Cranmer L, Kellie SAM (2003) The pollination ecology of an assemblage of grassland asclepiads in South Africa. Ann Bot 92:807–834. 10.1093/aob/mcg20614612378 10.1093/aob/mcg206
70. Sánchez Márquez S Bills GF Herrero N Zabalgogeazcoa Í Non-systemic fungal endophytes of grasses Fungal Ecol 2012 5 289 297 10.1016/j.funeco.2010.12.001
Sánchez Márquez S, Bills GF, Herrero N, Zabalgogeazcoa Í (2012) Non-systemic fungal endophytes of grasses. Fungal Ecol 5:289–297. 10.1016/j.funeco.2010.12.00110.1016/j.funeco.2010.12.001
71. Pereira E Vázquez de Aldana BR San Emeterio L Zabalgogeazcoa I A survey of culturable fungal endophytes from Festuca rubra subsp. pruinosa, a grass from marine cliffs, reveals a core microbiome Front Microbiol 2019 10.3389/fmicb.2018.03321 31921081
Pereira E, Vázquez de Aldana BR, San Emeterio L, Zabalgogeazcoa I (2019) A survey of culturable fungal endophytes from Festuca rubra subsp. pruinosa, a grass from marine cliffs, reveals a core microbiome. Front Microbiol. 10.3389/fmicb.2018.0332131921081 10.3389/fmicb.2018.03321
72. Caretta G Piontelli E Picco AM Del Frate G Some filamentous fungi on grassland vegetation from Kenya Mycopathologia 1999 145 155 169 10.1023/A:1007038112075
Caretta G, Piontelli E, Picco AM, Del Frate G (1999) Some filamentous fungi on grassland vegetation from Kenya. Mycopathologia 145:155–16910.1023/A:1007038112075
73. Chen KH Marcón F Duringer J Blount A Mackowiak C Liao H-L Leaf mycobiome and mycotoxin profile of warm-season grasses structured by plant species, geography, and apparent black-stroma fungal structure Appl Environ Microbiol 2022 88 e00942 e1022 10.1128/aem.00942-22 36226941
Chen KH, Marcón F, Duringer J, Blount A, Mackowiak C, Liao H-L (2022) Leaf mycobiome and mycotoxin profile of warm-season grasses structured by plant species, geography, and apparent black-stroma fungal structure. Appl Environ Microbiol 88:e00942-e1022. 10.1128/aem.00942-2236226941 10.1128/aem.00942-22
74. Neubert K Mendgen K Brinkmann H Wirsel SGR Only a few fungal species dominate highly diverse mycofloras associated with the common reed Appl Environ Microbiol 2006 72 1118 1128 10.1128/AEM.72.2.1118-1128.2006 16461657
Neubert K, Mendgen K, Brinkmann H, Wirsel SGR (2006) Only a few fungal species dominate highly diverse mycofloras associated with the common reed. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:1118–1128. 10.1128/AEM.72.2.1118-1128.200616461657 10.1128/AEM.72.2.1118-1128.2006
75. Morakotkarn D Kawasaki H Seki T Molecular diversity of bamboo-associated fungi isolated from Japan FEMS Microbiol Lett 2007 266 10 19 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2006.00489.x 17092298
Morakotkarn D, Kawasaki H, Seki T (2007) Molecular diversity of bamboo-associated fungi isolated from Japan. FEMS Microbiol Lett 266:10–19. 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2006.00489.x17092298 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2006.00489.x
76. Karunarathna A Withee P Pakdeeniti P Haituk S Tanakaew N Senwanna C Worldwide checklist on grass fungi: what do we know so far in Ascomycota Chiang Mai J Sci 2022 49 742 984 10.12982/CMJS.2022.058
Karunarathna A, Withee P, Pakdeeniti P, Haituk S, Tanakaew N, Senwanna C et al (2022) Worldwide checklist on grass fungi: what do we know so far in Ascomycota. Chiang Mai J Sci 49:742–98410.12982/CMJS.2022.058
77. Sabry A El-Zayat S El-Said A Abdel-Motaal F Magraby T Mycoflora associated with Halfa-bar leaves and stems (Cymbopogon schoenanthus L. Sprengel), in vitro the antimicrobial activity of the plant leaves and stems secondary metabolites Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 2014 3 874 882
Sabry A, El-Zayat S, El-Said A, Abdel-Motaal F, Magraby T (2014) Mycoflora associated with Halfa-bar leaves and stems (Cymbopogon schoenanthus L. Sprengel), in vitro the antimicrobial activity of the plant leaves and stems secondary metabolites. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 3:874–882
78. Olagunju O Mchunu N Venter S Guibert B Durand N Métayer I Fungal contamination of food commodities in Durban, South Africa J Food Saf 2018 38 e12515 10.1111/jfs.12515
Olagunju O, Mchunu N, Venter S, Guibert B, Durand N, Métayer I et al (2018) Fungal contamination of food commodities in Durban, South Africa. J Food Saf 38:e12515. 10.1111/jfs.1251510.1111/jfs.12515
79. Egidi E McMullan-Fisher S Morgan JW May T Zeeman B Franks AE Fire regime, not time-since-fire, affects soil fungal community diversity and composition in temperate grasslands FEMS Microbiol Lett 2016 10.1093/femsle/fnw196 27528692
Egidi E, McMullan-Fisher S, Morgan JW, May T, Zeeman B, Franks AE (2016) Fire regime, not time-since-fire, affects soil fungal community diversity and composition in temperate grasslands. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 10.1093/femsle/fnw19627528692 10.1093/femsle/fnw196
80. Rasmussen S Parsons AJ Russell J Bastías DA Liu Q Plant species, nitrogen status and endophytes are drivers of soil microbial communities in grasslands Crop Pasture Sci 2024 10.1071/CP23149
Rasmussen S, Parsons AJ, Russell J, Bastías DA, Liu Q (2024) Plant species, nitrogen status and endophytes are drivers of soil microbial communities in grasslands. Crop Pasture Sci. 10.1071/CP2314910.1071/CP23149
81. Boekhout T Guého-Kellermann E Mayser P Velegraki A Malassezia and the skin: science and clinical practice 2010 Berlin Springer
Boekhout T, Guého-Kellermann E, Mayser P, Velegraki A (2010) Malassezia and the skin: science and clinical practice. Springer, Berlin
82. Clay K Fungal endophytes of grasses Annu Rev Ecol Syst 1990 21 275 297 10.1146/annurev.es.21.110190.001423
Clay K (1990) Fungal endophytes of grasses. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 21:275–29710.1146/annurev.es.21.110190.001423
