Environmental DNA from archived leaves reveals widespread temporal turnover and biotic homogenization in forest arthropod communities

  1. Henrik Krehenwinkel  Is a corresponding author
  2. Sven Weber
  3. Rieke Broekmann
  4. Anja Melcher
  5. Julian Hans
  6. Rüdiger Wolf
  7. Axel Hochkirch
  8. Susan Rachel Kennedy
  9. Jan Koschorrek
  10. Sven Künzel
  11. Christoph Müller
  12. Rebecca Reztlaff
  13. Diana Teubner
  14. Sonja Schanzer
  15. Roland Klein
  16. Martin Paulus
  17. Thomas Udelhoven
  18. Michael Veith
  1. University of Trier, Germany
  2. German Federal Environment Agency, Germany
  3. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, Germany
  4. Ludwig Maximilians University, Germany

Abstract

A major limitation of current reports on insect declines is the lack of standardized, long-term, and taxonomically broad time series. Here, we demonstrate the utility of environmental DNA from archived leaf material to characterize plant-associated arthropod communities. We base our work on several multi-decadal leaf time series from tree canopies in four land use types, which were sampled as part of a long-term environmental monitoring program across Germany. Using these highly standardized and well-preserved samples, we analyze temporal changes in communities of several thousand arthropod species belonging to 23 orders using metabarcoding and quantitative PCR. Our data do not support widespread declines of α-diversity or genetic variation within sites. Instead, we find a gradual community turnover, which results in temporal and spatial biotic homogenization, across all land use types and all arthropod orders. Our results suggest that insect decline is more complex than mere α-diversity loss, but can be driven by β-diversity decay across space and time.

Data availability

All raw reads are available in the Dryad Digital Repository (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.x0k6djhmp).The OTU table with metadata and qPCR resullts has been uploaded as Supplementary Material

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Henrik Krehenwinkel

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    For correspondence
    krehenwinkel@uni-trier.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5069-8601
  2. Sven Weber

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Rieke Broekmann

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Anja Melcher

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Julian Hans

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Rüdiger Wolf

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8144-5954
  7. Axel Hochkirch

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Susan Rachel Kennedy

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Jan Koschorrek

    German Federal Environment Agency, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sven Künzel

    Department Evolutionary Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, Plön, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Christoph Müller

    Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Rebecca Reztlaff

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Diana Teubner

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Sonja Schanzer

    Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Roland Klein

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8735-0393
  16. Martin Paulus

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Thomas Udelhoven

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Michael Veith

    University of Trier, Trier, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

No external funding was received for this work.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Simon Creer

Version history

  1. Received: March 10, 2022
  2. Preprint posted: April 29, 2022 (view preprint)
  3. Accepted: November 6, 2022
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: November 10, 2022 (version 1)
  5. Version of Record published: December 20, 2022 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2022, Krehenwinkel et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,899
    views
  • 297
    downloads
  • 8
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Henrik Krehenwinkel
  2. Sven Weber
  3. Rieke Broekmann
  4. Anja Melcher
  5. Julian Hans
  6. Rüdiger Wolf
  7. Axel Hochkirch
  8. Susan Rachel Kennedy
  9. Jan Koschorrek
  10. Sven Künzel
  11. Christoph Müller
  12. Rebecca Reztlaff
  13. Diana Teubner
  14. Sonja Schanzer
  15. Roland Klein
  16. Martin Paulus
  17. Thomas Udelhoven
  18. Michael Veith
(2022)
Environmental DNA from archived leaves reveals widespread temporal turnover and biotic homogenization in forest arthropod communities
eLife 11:e78521.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.78521

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.78521

Further reading

    1. Ecology
    Anna L Erdei, Aneth B David ... Teun Dekker
    Research Article Updated

    Over two decades ago, an intercropping strategy was developed that received critical acclaim for synergizing food security with ecosystem resilience in smallholder farming. The push–pull strategy reportedly suppresses lepidopteran pests in maize through a combination of a repellent intercrop (push), commonly Desmodium spp., and an attractive, border crop (pull). Key in the system is the intercrop’s constitutive release of volatile terpenoids that repel herbivores. However, the earlier described volatile terpenoids were not detectable in the headspace of Desmodium, and only minimally upon herbivory. This was independent of soil type, microbiome composition, and whether collections were made in the laboratory or in the field. Furthermore, in oviposition choice tests in a wind tunnel, maize with or without an odor background of Desmodium was equally attractive for the invasive pest Spodoptera frugiperda. In search of an alternative mechanism, we found that neonate larvae strongly preferred Desmodium over maize. However, their development stagnated and no larva survived. In addition, older larvae were frequently seen impaled and immobilized by the dense network of silica-fortified, non-glandular trichomes. Thus, our data suggest that Desmodium may act through intercepting and decimating dispersing larval offspring rather than adult deterrence. As a hallmark of sustainable pest control, maize–Desmodium push–pull intercropping has inspired countless efforts to emulate stimulo-deterrent diversion in other cropping systems. However, detailed knowledge of the actual mechanisms is required to rationally improve the strategy, and translate the concept to other cropping systems.

    1. Ecology
    Songdou Zhang, Shiheng An
    Insight

    The bacterium responsible for a disease that infects citrus plants across Asia facilitates its own proliferation by increasing the fecundity of its host insect.