Ruitton, S. | bioRxiv Science

bioRxiv2025

Separating faces in ARMS metabarcoding improves marine biodiversity monitoring: a comparison across protocols, experimental designs, and photographic surveys

Monitoring marine biodiversity requires approaches that capture its full complexity through space and time. DNA metabarcoding coupled with Autonomous Reef Monitoring Structures (ARMS) is increasingly used for this purpose, yet most applications still pool all sessile fractions and rarely benchmark molecular ouputs against photographic observations. Here, we combined photographic analysis with cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) metabarcoding across ten north-western Mediterranean sites to test, compare, and refine ARMS-based monitoring protocols. We first optimized laboratory procedures (DNA extraction and polymerase choice) and applied the control-driven, replicate-aware VTAM pipeline to minimize false positives and ensure full traceability. We then conducted the first face-by-face comparison of - and {beta}-diversity between imaging and eDNA in which each individual ARMS face was metabarcoded separately rather than pooled. Metabarcoding detected [~]15x higher site-level richness and revealed stronger correlations with geographic distance and environmental gradients, whereas photography provided complementary information on macro-taxa and surface cover. For metabarcoding, processing each face separately yielded much higher richness and markedly stronger {beta}-diversity-distance correlations than with the NOAA pooling protocol, demonstrating that pooling inflates sampling variance resulting in a loss of the ecological signal. Grouping faces into five structural categories offered a more operational alternative while further increasing -diversity and strengthening {beta}-diversity correlations. Overall, our results show that retaining ARMS microhabitat structure is critical for maximizing metabarcoding performance. Using five structural sessile fractions per ARMS combined with a control-driven bioinformatic workflow provides a reproducible, scalable framework for long-term eDNA monitoring and early detection of biodiversity change.

ecology↗

bioRxiv2023

Non-indigenous seaweeds in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea and Macaronesia: a critical synthesis of diversity, spatial and temporal patterns

Effective monitoring and combatting the effect of non-indigenous seaweeds relies on a solid confirmation of the non-indigenous status of the species. We critically analysed the status of presumed non-indigenous seaweed species reported from the Mediterranean Sea, the Northeast Atlantic Ocean and Macaronesia, resulting in a list of 140 species whose non-indigenous nature is undisputed. For an additional 87 species it is unclear if they are native or non-indigenous (cryptogenic species) or their identity requires confirmation (data deficient species). We discuss the factors underlying both taxonomic and biogeographic uncertainties and outline recommendations to reduce uncertainty about the non-indigenous status of seaweeds. Our dataset consisted of over 19,000 distribution records, half of which can be attributed to only five species (Sargassum muticum, Bonnemaisonia hamifera, Asparagopsis armata, Caulerpa cylindracea and Colpomenia peregrina), while 56 species (40%) are recorded no more than once or twice. In addition, our analyses revealed considerable variation in the diversity of non-indigenous species between the geographic regions. The Eastern Mediterranean Sea is home to the largest fraction of non-indigenous seaweed species, the majority of which have a Red Sea or Indo-Pacific origin and have entered the Mediterranean Sea mostly via the Suez Canal. Non-indigenous seaweeds with native ranges situated in the Northwest Pacific make up a large fraction of the total in the Western Mediterranean Sea, Lusitania and Northern Europe, followed by non-indigenous species with a presumed Australasian origin. Uncertainty remains, however, regarding the native range of a substantial fraction of non-indigenous seaweeds in the study area. In so far as analyses of first detections can serve as a proxy for the introduction rate of non-indigenous seaweeds, these do not reveal a decrease in the introduction rate, indicating that the current measures and policies are insufficient to battle the introduction and spread of non-indigenous species in the study area. HighlightsO_LINon-indigenous seaweed species in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea and Macaronesia are critically reanalysed. C_LIO_LI>19,000 distribution records revealed considerable variation in diversity of non-indigenous seaweed species in the study area. C_LIO_LITaxonomic and biogeographic uncertainties hamper a critical evaluation of the non-indigenous status of many seaweed species. C_LI

plant biology↗