Advertisement

Marine Biology

, Volume 146, Issue 6, pp 1119–1129 | Cite as

Single-step nested multiplex PCR to differentiate between various bivalve larvae

  • J. B. Larsen
  • M. E. Frischer
  • L. J. Rasmussen
  • B. W. Hansen
Research Article

Abstract

A nested multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay has been developed that allows the discrimination between six bivalve larvae common to Danish coastal waters (Cerastoderma edule, Macoma balthica, Mytilus edulis, Spisula subtruncata, Ensis americanus and members of the order Myoida). This assay involves the simultaneous use of a pair of general universally targeted 18S rRNA gene primers, five specific 18S rRNA gene targeted oligonucleotide primers internal (nested) to the universal primer pair and one species-specific primer that is not nested (Mya). The specificity of each primer was evaluated in silico, empirically, and verified further by sequencing of amplification products from single larvae collected from plankton samples. Identification of individually isolated bivalve larvae from plankton samples was based on the size of the PCR product produced by the specific primers after visualisation by agarose gel electrophoresis. Preliminary studies indicated that this method was suitable for use with freshly collected and preserved larvae, and is therefore suitable for field application.

Keywords

Bivalve Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction Plankton Sample Bivalve Species Macoma Balthica 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank T. Møller Pedersen, Dr. A.B. Josefson and Dr. J. Hansen for collecting plankton samples and adult specimens of bivalves. We also would like to thank Dr. G. Høpner Petersen for help in species identification of adult bivalve specimens. A warm thanks goes to everybody in the Frischer laboratory at the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, to L.J. Rasmussen’s laboratory for technical assistance and to Dr. H.C. Bisgaard for advice during the early stage of the study. This research was supported by the Danish National Science Research Council no. 21010549, the Carlsberg Foundation project no. 990812/10-1177 to B.W.H., and grants from the US National Science Foundation OCE 99-82133 and the US Department of Energy FG02-98ER62531 to M.E.F. The experiments presented in this paper comply with the current law of Denmark.

References

  1. Arnold WS, Hitchcock GL, Frischer ME, Wanninkhof R, Sheng P (2004) Dispersal of an introduced larval cohort in a coastal lagoon. Limnol Oceanogr (in press)Google Scholar
  2. Baker P, Mann R (2003) Late stage bivalve larvae in a well-mixed estuary are not inert particles. Estuaries 26:837–845Google Scholar
  3. Bayne BL (1965) Growth and the delay of metamorphosis of the larvae of Mytilus edulis L. Ophelia 2:1–47Google Scholar
  4. Bayne BL (1976) The biology of mussel larvae. In: Bayne BL (ed) Marine mussels—Their ecology and physiology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 81–119Google Scholar
  5. Belgrano A, Legendre P, Dewarumez JM, Frontier S (1995) Spatial structure and ecological variations of meroplankton on the French–Belgian coast of the North Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 128:43–50Google Scholar
  6. Bell JL, Grassle JP (1998) A DNA probe for identification of larvae of the commercial surf clam (Spisula solidissima). Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol 7:127–137Google Scholar
  7. Butman CA (1987) Larval settlement of soft-sediment invertebrates: the spatial scales of pattern explained by active habitat selection and the emerging role of hydrodynamical processes. Oceanogr Mar Biol Ann Rev 25:113–165Google Scholar
  8. Calabrese A (1969) Individual and combined effects of salinity and temperature on embryos and larvae of the coot clam Mulinia lateralis (Say). Biol Bull (Woods Hole) 137:417–428Google Scholar
  9. Cary SC (1996) PCR-based method for single egg and embryo identification in marine organisms. Biotechniques 21:998–1000Google Scholar
  10. Chanley P, Andrews JD (1971) Aids for identification of bivalve larvae of Virginia. Malacologia 11:45–119Google Scholar
  11. Chicharo L, Chicharo MA (2001) Effects of environmental conditions on planktonic abundances, benthic recruitment and growth rates of the bivalve mollusk Ruditapes decussates in a Portuguese coastal lagoon. Fish Res (Amst) 53:235–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Comtet T, Jollivet D, Khripounoff A, Segonzac M, Dixon DR (2000) Molecular and morphological identification of settlement-stage vent mussel larvae, Bathymodiolus azoricus (Bivalvia: Mytilidae), preserved in situ at active vent fields on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Limnol Oceanogr 45:1655–1661Google Scholar
  13. Corte-Real HBSM, Dixon DR, Holland PWH (1994) Inheritance of a nuclear DNA polymorphism assayed in single bivalve larvae. Mar Biol 120:415–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dawson MN, Raskoff KA, Jacobs DK (1998) Field preservation of marine invertebrate tissue for DNA analysis. Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol 7:145–152Google Scholar
  15. De Montaudouin X (1997) Potential of bivalves’ secondary settlement differs with species: a comparison between cockle (Cerastoderma edule) and clam (Ruditapes philippinarum) juvenile resuspension. Mar Biol 128:639–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Vooys CGN (1999) Numbers of larvae and primary plantigrades of the mussel Mytilus edulis in the western Dutch Wadden Sea. J Sea Res 41:189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fingerut JT, Zimmer CA, Zimmer RK (2003) Larval swimming overpowers turbulent mixing and facilitates transmission of a marine parasite. Ecology 84:2502–2515Google Scholar
  18. Frischer ME, Danforth JM, Tyner LC, Leverone JR, Marelli DC, Arnold WS, Blake NJ (2000) Development of an Argopecten-specific 18S rRNA targeted genetic probe. Mar Biotechnol 2:11–20Google Scholar
  19. Frischer ME, Hansen AS, Wyllie JA, Wimbush J, Murray J, Nierzwicki-Bauer SA (2002) Specific amplification of the 18S rRNA gene as a method to detect zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) larvae in plankton samples. Hydrobiologia 487:33–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Garland ED, Zimmer CA (2002) Techniques for the identification of bivalve larvae. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 225:299–310Google Scholar
  21. Garland ED, Zimmer CA, Lentz SJ (2002) Larval distributions in inner-shelf waters: the roles of wind-driven cross-shelf currents and diel vertical migrations. Limnol Oceanogr 47:803–817Google Scholar
  22. Grüebl T, Frischer ME, Sheppard M, Neumann M, Lee RF (2002) Development of a 18S rRNA gene targeted PCR based diagnostic for the blue crab parasite, Hematodinium spp. Dis Aquat Org 49:61–70Google Scholar
  23. Hansen BW, Stenalt E, Petersen JK, Ellegaard C (2002) Invertebrate re-colonisation in Mariager Fjord (Denmark) after severe hypoxia. I. Zooplankton and settlement. Ophelia 56:197–213Google Scholar
  24. Hare MP, Palumbi SR, Butman CA (2000) Single-step species identification of bivalve larvae using multiplex polymerase chain reaction. Mar Biol 137:953–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hiney MP, Smith PR (1998) Validation of polymerase chain reaction–based techniques for proxy detection of bacterial fish pathogens: framework, problems and possible solutions for environmental applications. Aquaculture 162:41–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoeh WR, Stewart DT, Saavedra C, Sutherland BW, Zouros E (1997) Phylogenetic evidence for role-reversals of gender-associated mitochondrial DNA in Mytilus (Bivalvia: Mytilidae). Mol Biol Evol 14:959–967PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hrs-Brenko M (1978) The relationship of temperature and salinity to larval development in mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis Lamarck) physiology and behaviour of marine organisms. In: McLusky DS, Berry AT (eds) Proceedings of the 12th European symposium on marine biology. Pergamon, Oxford, pp 359–365Google Scholar
  28. Insua A, Lopez-Pinon MJ, Freire R, Mendez J (2003) Sequence analysis of the ribosomal DNA internal transcribed spacer region in some scallop species (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Pectinidae). Genome 46:595–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jensen KR, Knudsen J (1995) Annotated checklist of recent marine molluscs of Danish waters. H.C.Ø. TRYK, Copenhagen, pp 11--48Google Scholar
  30. Jensen S, Spärck R (1934) Bløddyr II. Saltvandsmuslinger. In: Danmarks fauna, vol 40. Danmarks Naturhistoriske Forening, G.E.C. Gads, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  31. Jørgensen CB (1981) Mortality, growth, and grazing impact of a cohort of bivalve larvae, Mytilus edulis L. Ophelia 20:185–192Google Scholar
  32. Kingston P (1974) Some observations on the effect of temperature and salinity upon the growth of Cardium edule and Cardium glaucum larvae in the laboratory. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 54:309–317Google Scholar
  33. Lindeque PK, Harris RP, Jones MB, Smerdon GR (1999) Simple molecular method to distinguish the identity of Calanus species (Copepoda: Calanoida) at any development stage. Mar Biol 133:91–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lindstrom DP (1999) Molecular species identification of newly hatched Hawaiian amphidromous gobioid larvae. Mar Biotechnol 1:167–174Google Scholar
  35. Loosanoff VL, Davis HC, Chanley PE (1966) Dimension and shapes of larvae of some marine bivalve molluscs. Malacologia 4:351–435Google Scholar
  36. Lopez-Pinon MJ, Insua A, Mendez J (2002) Identification of four scallop species using PCR and restriction analysis of the ribosomal DNA internal transcribed spacer region. Mar Biotechnol 4:495–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lutz RA, Kennish MJ (1992) Ecology and morphology of larval and early postlarval mussels. In: Gosling E (ed) The mussel Mytilus edulis: ecology, physiology, genetics and culture, book 25. Developments in aquaculture and fisheries science. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 53–85Google Scholar
  38. Lutz R, Goodsell J, Castagna M, Chapman S, Newell, Hidu H, Mann R, Jablonski D, Kennedy V, Siddall S, Goldberg R, Beattie H, Falmagne C, Chestnut A, Partridge A (1982) Preliminary observations on the usefulness of hinge structure for identification of bivalve larvae. J Shellfish Res 2:65–70Google Scholar
  39. Mann R (1988) Field studies of bivalve larvae and their recruitment to the benthos: a commentary. J Shellfish Res 7:7–10Google Scholar
  40. Metaxas A (2001) Behaviour in flow: perspectives on the distribution and dispersion of meroplanktonic larvae in the water column. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:86–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Morgan S (1994) Influence of tidal regime on timing of larval release: implications for recruitment. In: Dyer J, Orth M (eds) Changes in fluxes in estuaries—Implications from science to management. Proceedings of the ECSA22/ERF Symposium. University of Plymouth, Plymouth, pp 323–329Google Scholar
  42. Ockelmann KW (1958) The zoology of East Greenland: marine Lamellibranchiata. Meddr Grønl 122:1–256Google Scholar
  43. Olson RR, Runstandler JA, Kocher TD (1991) Whose larvae? Nature 351:357–358CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Pank M, Stanhope M, Natanson L, Kohler N, Shivji M (2001) Rapid and simultaneous identification of body parts from the morphologically similar sharks Carcharhinus obscurus and Carcharhinus plumbeus (Carcharhinidae) using multiplex PCR. Mar Biotechnol 3:231–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Passamonti M, Scali V (2001) Gender-associated mitochondrial DNA heteroplasmy in the venerid clam Tapes philippinarum (Mollusca Bivalvia). Curr Genet 39:117–24CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Pechenik JA, Eyster LS, Widdows J, Bayne BL (1990) The influence of temperature on growth and morphological differentiation of blue mussel larvae Mytilus galloprovincialis L. larvae. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 136:47–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Petersen JK, Stenalt E, Hansen BW (2002) Invertebrate re-colonisation in Mariager Fjord (Denmark) after a severe hypoxia. II. Blue mussels (Mytilus edulis L.). Ophelia 56:215–226Google Scholar
  48. Pülfrich A (1997) Seasonal variation in the occurrence of planktonic bivalve larvae in the Schleswig-Holstein Wadden Sea. Helgol Meeresunters 51:23–39Google Scholar
  49. Rawson PD, Hilbish TJ (1995) Evolutionary relationships among the male and female mitochondrial DNA lineages in the Mytilus edulis species complex. Mol Biol Evol 12:893–901Google Scholar
  50. Richards S, Possingham H, Noye B (1995) Larval dispersion along a straight coast with tidal currents: complex distribution patterns from a simple model. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 122:59–71Google Scholar
  51. Roegner GC (2000) Transport of molluscan larvae through a shallow estuary. J Plankton Res 22:1779–1800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schneider DW, Stoeckel JA, Rehmann CR, Blodgett KD, Sparks RE, Padilla DK (2003) A developmental bottleneck in dispersing larvae: implications for spatial population dynamics. Ecol Lett 6:352–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shanks Al, Largier J, Brubaker J (2003) Observations on the distribution of meroplankton during an upwelling event. J Plankton Res 25:645–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Skibinski DOF, Edwards CA (1987) Mitochondrial DNA variation in marine mussels (Mytilus). In: Proceedings of the world symposium on selection, hybridization in aquaculture, 27–30 May 1986, Bordeaux, vol 1, pp 209–226Google Scholar
  55. Sprung M (1984) Physiological energetics of mussel larvae (Mytilus edulis). I. Shell growth and biomass. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 17:283–293Google Scholar
  56. Stenalt E, Johansen B, Lillienskjold SV, Hansen BW (1998) Mesocosm study of Mytilus edulis larvae and postlarvae, including the settlement phase, exposed to a gradient of tributyltin. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 40:212–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ (1994) CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 22:4673–4680PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. von Wintzingerode F, Gobel UB, Stackebrandt E (1997) Determination of microbial diversity in environmental samples: pitfalls of PCR-based rRNA analysis. FEMS Microbiol Rev 21:213–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Wood AR, Beaumont AR, Skibinski DOF, Turner G (2003) Analysis of a nuclear-DNA marker for species identification of adults and larvae in the Mytilus edulis complex. J Molluscan Stud 69:61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Young CM, Chia FS (1987) Abundance and distribution of pelagic larvae as influenced by predation, behaviour and hydrographic factors. In: Giese AC, Pearse JS (eds) Reproduction of marine invertebrates, vol 9. Academic, New York, pp 385–463Google Scholar
  61. Young EF, Bigg GR, Grant A, Walker P, Brown J (1998) A modeling study of environmental influences on bivalve settlement in The Walsh, England. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 172:197–214Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. B. Larsen
    • 1
  • M. E. Frischer
    • 2
  • L. J. Rasmussen
    • 1
  • B. W. Hansen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Life Sciences and ChemistryRoskilde UniversityRoskildeDenmark
  2. 2.Skidaway Institute of OceanographySavannahUSA

Personalised recommendations