Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012;7(7):e39345.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0039345. Epub 2012 Jul 3.

Barcoding sponges: an overview based on comprehensive sampling

Affiliations

Barcoding sponges: an overview based on comprehensive sampling

Sergio Vargas et al. PLoS One. 2012.

Abstract

Background: Phylum Porifera includes ∼8,500 valid species distributed world-wide in aquatic ecosystems ranging from ephemeral fresh-water bodies to coastal environments and the deep-sea. The taxonomy and systematics of sponges is complicated, and morphological identification can be both time consuming and erroneous due to phenotypic convergence and secondary losses, etc. DNA barcoding can provide sponge biologists with a simple and rapid method for the identification of samples of unknown taxonomic membership. The Sponge Barcoding Project (www.spongebarcoding.org), the first initiative to barcode a non-bilaterian metazoan phylum, aims to provide a comprehensive DNA barcode database for Phylum Porifera.

Methodology/principal findings: ∼7,400 sponge specimens have been extracted, and amplification of the standard COI barcoding fragment has been attempted for approximately 3,300 museum samples with ∼25% mean amplification success. Based on this comprehensive sampling, we present the first report on the workflow and progress of the sponge barcoding project, and discuss some common pitfalls inherent to the barcoding of sponges.

Conclusion: A DNA-barcoding workflow capable of processing potentially large sponge collections has been developed and is routinely used for the Sponge Barcoding Project with success. Sponge specific problems such as the frequent co-amplification of non-target organisms have been detected and potential solutions are currently under development. The initial success of this innovative project have already demonstrated considerable refinement of sponge systematics, evaluating morphometric character importance, geographic phenotypic variability, and the utility of the standard barcoding fragment for Porifera (despite its conserved evolution within this basal metazoan phylum).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: Dirk Steinke is Campaign Coordinator for the MarBOL initiative and a co-organizer of the PLoS ONE MarBOL Collection. The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Amplification success of the standard barcoding COI partition per sponge family.
Grey and black colours represent failed and positive reactions, respectively. Only families with more than 30 documented PCRs are included in the figure, these taxa correspond to the families analised in the generalised linear model. Asterisks on the right side correspond to the different family groups analysed: *: Acarnidae, Ancorinidae, Axinellidae, Dictyonellidae, Dysideidae, Halichondridae, Iotrochotidae, Microcionidae, Mycalidae, Plakinidae, Raspailidae, Tedaniidae, Tetillidae and Thorectidae; **: Chalinidae, Clionaidae and Suberitidae; ***: Chondropsidae, Coelosphaeridae, Crellidae, Desmacellidae, Isodictyidae and Podospongiidae.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Sequencing success rates per sponge family.
Grey and black colours represent sequences corresponding to non-target organisms and poriferans, respectively. The included families correspond to the families used for the analysis of PCR success, and were analised in the generalised linear model. Asterisks on the right side correspond to the different family groups analysed: *: Acarnidae, Ancorinidae, Axinellidae, Dictyonellidae, Dysideidae, Halichondridae, Iotrochotidae, Microcionidae, Mycalidae, Plakinidae, Raspailidae, Tedaniidae, Tetillidae and Thorectidae; **: Chalinidae, Clionaidae and Suberitidae; ***: Chondropsidae, Coelosphaeridae, Crellidae, Desmacellidae, Isodictyidae and Podospongiidae.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Gatti S. The Role of Sponges in High-Antarctic Carbon and Silicon Cycling – a Modelling Approach. Bericht zur Polar und Meeresforschung. 2002;434:1–134.
    1. Gutt J. Antarctic macro-zoobenthic communities: a review and an ecological classification. Antarct Sci. 2007;19:165–182.
    1. Bell JJ. The functional roles of marine sponges. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 2008;79:341–353.
    1. Webster NS, Taylor MW. Marine sponges and their microbial symbionts: love and other relationships. Environmental Microbiology. 2011;14:335–346. - PubMed
    1. van Soest RWM, Boury-Esnault N, Hooper JNA, Rützler K, De Voogd NJ, et al. World Porifera database. 2012. Available online at http://www.marinespecies.org/porifera. Consulted on 09-05-2012.

Publication types