Display options
Cite
Hammer TJ, Dickerson JC, Fierer N. Evidence-based recommendations on storing and handling specimens for analyses of insect microbiota. PeerJ. 2015;3:e1190doi: 10.7717/peerj.1190.
Hammer, T. J., Dickerson, J. C., & Fierer, N. (2015). Evidence-based recommendations on storing and handling specimens for analyses of insect microbiota. PeerJ, 3e1190. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1190
Hammer, Tobin J, et al. "Evidence-based recommendations on storing and handling specimens for analyses of insect microbiota." PeerJ vol. 3 (2015): e1190. doi: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1190
Hammer TJ, Dickerson JC, Fierer N. Evidence-based recommendations on storing and handling specimens for analyses of insect microbiota. PeerJ. 2015 Aug 18;3:e1190. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1190. eCollection 2015. PMID: 26311208; PMCID: PMC4548535.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

PeerJ. 2015 Aug 18;3:e1190. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1190. eCollection 2015.

Evidence-based recommendations on storing and handling specimens for analyses of insect microbiota.

PeerJ

Tobin J Hammer, Jacob C Dickerson, Noah Fierer

Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado at Boulder , Boulder, CO , United States ; Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado at Boulder , Boulder, CO , United States.
  2. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado at Boulder , Boulder, CO , United States.

PMID: 26311208 PMCID: PMC4548535 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.1190

Abstract

Research on insect microbiota has greatly expanded over the past decade, along with a growing appreciation of the microbial contributions to insect ecology and evolution. Many of these studies use DNA sequencing to characterize the diversity and composition of insect-associated microbial communities. The choice of strategies used for specimen collection, storage, and handling could introduce biases in molecular assessments of insect microbiota, but such potential influences have not been systematically evaluated. Likewise, although it is common practice to surface sterilize insects prior to DNA extraction, it is not known if this time-consuming step has any effect on microbial community analyses. To resolve these methodological unknowns, we conducted an experiment wherein replicate individual insects of four species were stored intact for two months using five different methods-freezing, ethanol, dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), cetrimonium bromide (CTAB), and room-temperature storage without preservative-and then subjected to whole-specimen 16S rRNA gene sequencing to assess whether the structure of the insect-associated bacterial communities was impacted by these different storage strategies. Overall, different insect species harbored markedly distinct bacterial communities, a pattern that was highly robust to the method used to store samples. Storage method had little to no effect on assessments of microbiota composition, and the magnitude of the effect differed among the insect species examined. No single method emerged as "best," i.e., one consistently having the highest similarity in community structure to control specimens, which were not stored prior to homogenization and DNA sequencing. We also found that surface sterilization did not change bacterial community structure as compared to unsterilized insects, presumably due to the vastly greater microbial biomass inside the insect body relative to its surface. We therefore recommend that researchers can use any of the methods tested here, and base their choice according to practical considerations such as prior use, cost, and availability in the field, although we still advise that all samples within a study be handled in an identical manner when possible. We also suggest that, in large-scale molecular studies of hundreds of insect specimens, surface sterilization may not be worth the time and effort involved. This information should help researchers design sampling strategies and will facilitate cross-comparisons and meta-analyses of microbial community data obtained from insect specimens preserved in different ways.

Keywords: 16S rRNA; Bacterial communities; Bean beetle; Cabbage white butterfly; Grasshopper; Honey bee; Methods; Microbiome; Sequencing; Symbiosis

References

  1. Annu Rev Entomol. 2015 Jan 7;60:17-34 - PubMed
  2. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Jun 3;111(22):E2329-38 - PubMed
  3. J Med Entomol. 2004 May;41(3):340-8 - PubMed
  4. Microbiologyopen. 2014 Dec;3(6):910-21 - PubMed
  5. Ecol Lett. 2014 Jul;17(7):794-802 - PubMed
  6. Mol Ecol Resour. 2015 May;15(3):613-8 - PubMed
  7. Proc Biol Sci. 2014 Nov 22;281(1795):null - PubMed
  8. Nat Methods. 2013 Oct;10(10):996-8 - PubMed
  9. PLoS One. 2013 Jul 31;8(7):e70460 - PubMed
  10. Mol Ecol. 1999 Nov;8(11):1935-45 - PubMed
  11. BMC Microbiol. 2014 Apr 23;14:103 - PubMed
  12. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014 Sep;80(17):5254-64 - PubMed
  13. PLoS One. 2013 Nov 01;8(11):e79061 - PubMed
  14. PLoS One. 2013 Apr 16;8(4):e61218 - PubMed
  15. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2014 Dec;12(12):789-90 - PubMed
  16. ISME J. 2012 Aug;6(8):1621-4 - PubMed
  17. Annu Rev Entomol. 2004;49:71-92 - PubMed
  18. Mol Ecol. 2012 Oct;21(20):5124-37 - PubMed
  19. Mol Ecol Resour. 2014 Sep;14(5):1032-48 - PubMed
  20. Mol Ecol. 2013 Apr;22(7):2028-44 - PubMed
  21. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Aug;73(16):5261-7 - PubMed
  22. PLoS One. 2014 Jan 23;9(1):e86995 - PubMed
  23. Mol Ecol. 2014 Mar;23(6):1268-83 - PubMed
  24. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Aug 5;111(31):11509-14 - PubMed
  25. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2010 Jun;307(1):80-6 - PubMed
  26. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Nov 18;105(46):17994-9 - PubMed
  27. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2013 Sep;37(5):699-735 - PubMed
  28. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011 Jul;77(13):4303-12 - PubMed
  29. ISME J. 2012 Mar;6(3):610-8 - PubMed

Publication Types