Molecular Ecology ResourcesMicrobiologyPeer-reviewed journal article
Sampling design and sample processing affect soil biodiversity assessments
Meirong CheniD, Olesya V. DulyaiD, Vladimir S. MikryukoviD, Ovidiu CopoțiD, Martin MetsojaiD, Leho TedersooiD
Abstract
Biodiversity surveys require an appropriate sampling design for optimal performance and comparability across space and time and across studies. Based on PacBio and Illumina amplicon sequencing of animals, bacteria and fungi, we assessed and compared various soil sampling designs from widely used continental and global metabarcoding-based biodiversity projects. Sampling designs revealed up to 27-fold, 6-fold and 15-fold differences in biodiversity estimates for animals, bacteria and fungi, respectively. Taxonomic coverage depended mostly on the number of subsamples but not sampling area within the 347-1790 m2, 428-1924 m2, 327-1790 m2 plot size range for animals, bacteria and fungi, respectively. Additional sampling of subsoil did not add significantly to diversity estimates of animals and fungi, although there was a slight positive effect on bacteria. Both soil pooling (compositing subsamples before DNA extraction) and DNA pooling (combining DNA extracts prior to PCR) reduced differences between sampling designs by decreasing diversity estimates in designs with many subsamples while increasing them in designs with fewer subsamples. However, pooling did not eliminate the influence of sampling factors (soil depth, sampling area and sample size). DNA pooling outperformed soil pooling in inventorying animals and fungi but not bacteria. Pooling had no effect on recovering rare biological species or sequencing artefacts. Soil pooling saved from 79.5% to 98.3% of labour and analytical costs compared with no pooling, depending on the number of pooled subsamples. The remarkable impact of sampling design on community diversity and composition should be considered during data collection and meta-analyses compiling data from different sampling designs.
- Citations
- 8
- FWCI
- 27.74
- Field percentile
- top 1%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- The illusion of diversity: sampling design drives conflicting estimates of soil bacterial richness
Maria Kostakou, Niklas Neisse, … Stephanie D. Jurburg·bioRxiv·Jul 3, 2026
- Effects of source sample amount on biodiversity surveys of bacteria, fungi, and nematodes in soil ecosystems
T. Kageyama, H. Toju·bioRxiv·May 26, 2022
- Scalable isolation of soil genomic DNA from microbes to multicellular micro- and mesofauna
Sannakajsa Velmala, Tero T. Tuomivirta, … Taina Pennanen·bioRxiv·Jan 17, 2026
- Sampling strategies to assess microbial diversity of Antarctic cryptoendolithic communities.
C. COLEINE, J. E. Stajich, … L. Selbmann·bioRxiv·Jun 21, 2019
- Benchmarking full-length ITS metabarcoding across Illumina 2x500, PacBio, and Oxford Nanopore sequencing using mock and soil communities
Leho Tedersoo, Marko Prous, … Vladimir S. Mikryukov·bioRxiv·May 21, 2026
- A systematic survey of regional multitaxon biodiversity: evaluating strategies and coverage
A. K. Brunbjerg, H. H. Bruun, … R. Ejrnaes·BMC EcologyPeer-reviewed·Oct 15, 2019