Biodiversity and distribution of zoobenthos in the ecological water replenishment area of the Yellow River estuary coastal wetland revealed by eDNA metabarcoding

12. Fang J, Jiang W, Meng S, He W, Wang G, Guo E, et al. Polychaete Bioturbation Alters the Taxonomic Structure, Co-occurrence Network, and Functional Groups of Bacterial Communities in the Intertidal Flat. Microb Ecol. 2023; 86: 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-022-02036-2 PMID: 35604433 13. Thomsen ES, Almeda R, Nielsen TG. Tire particles and their leachates reduce the filtration rate of the mussel Mytilus edulis. Marine Environmental Research. 2024; 195: 106348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. marenvres.2024.106348. 14. Moss B. Ecology of fresh waters: a view for the twenty-first century. John Wiley & Sons; 2010. 15. Me´ndez N. Effects of sediment organic matter on mortality, growth and development of the polychaetes Capitella teleta and Capitella sp. (Annelida: Capitellidae) in laboratory conditions. scimar. 2022; 86: e034. https://doi.org/10.3989/scimar.05208.034. 16. Nikula R, Strelkov P, Va¨ ino¨ la¨ R. A broad transition zone between an inner Baltic hybrid swarm and a pure North Sea subspecies of Macoma balthica (Mollusca, Bivalvia). Molecular Ecology. 2008; 17: 1505–1522. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03688.x. 17. Lockwood BL, Somero GN. Transcriptomic responses to salinity stress in invasive and native blue mus- sels (genus Mytilus). Mol Ecol. 2011; 20: 517–529. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04973.x. 18. Cheng Q, Chang H, Yang X, Wang D, Wang W. Salinity and nutrient modulate soil bacterial communi- ties in the coastal wetland of the Yellow River Delta, China. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2021; 28: 14621–

14631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11626-x PMID: 33219506 19. Yang M, Lu K, Batzer DP, Wu H. Freshwater release into estuarine wetlands changes the structure of benthic invertebrate assemblages: A case study from the Yellow River Delta. Sci Total Environ. 2019; 687: 752–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.154 PMID: 31412478 20. Pawlowski J, Bruce K, Panksep K, Aguirre FI, Amalfitano S, Apothe´ loz-Perret-Gentil L, et al. Environ- mental DNA metabarcoding for benthic monitoring: A review of sediment sampling and DNA extraction methods. Science of The Total Environment. 2022; 818: 151783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2021.151783 PMID: 34801504 21. Weigand H, Beermann AJ, Čiampor F, Costa FO, Csabai Z, Duarte S, et al. DNA barcode reference libraries for the monitoring of aquatic biota in Europe: Gap-analysis and recommendations for future work. Science of The Total Environment. 2019; 678: 499–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019. 04.247 PMID: 31077928 22. Ruppert KM, Kline RJ, Rahman MS. Past, present, and future perspectives of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding: A systematic review in methods, monitoring, and applications of global eDNA. Global Ecology and Conservation. 2019; 17: e00547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00547. 23. Valentini A, Taberlet P, Miaud C, Civade R, Herder J, Thomsen PF, et al. Next-generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Molecular Ecology. 2016; 25: 929–942. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13428 PMID: 26479867

24. He X, Sutherland TF, Abbott CL. Improved efficiency in eDNA metabarcoding of benthic metazoans by sieving sediments prior to DNA extraction. Environmental DNA. 2021; 3: 716–726. https://doi.org/10. 1002/edn3.172. 25. Prie´ V, Valentini A, Lopes-Lima M, Froufe E, Rocle M, Poulet N, et al. Environmental DNA metabarcod- ing for freshwater bivalves biodiversity assessment: methods and results for the Western Palearctic (European sub-region). Hydrobiologia. 2021; 848: 2931–2950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-020- 04260-8. 26. Pesˇić V, Gadawski P, Gligorović B, Glo¨ er P, Grabowski M, Kova´ cs T, et al. The Diversity of the Zoo- benthos Communities of the Lake Skadar/Shkodra Basin. In: Pesˇić V, Karaman G, Kostianoy AG, edi- tors. The Skadar/Shkodra Lake Environment. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. pp. 255– 293. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2017_234. 27. Pawlowski J, Bruce K, Panksep K, Aguirre FI, Amalfitano S, Apothe´ loz-Perret-Gentil L, et al. Environ- mental DNA metabarcoding for benthic monitoring: A review of sediment sampling and DNA extraction methods. Science of The Total Environment. 2022; 818: 151783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2021.151783 PMID: 34801504 28. Antich A, Palacı´n C, Cebrian E, Golo R, Wangensteen OS, Turon X. Marine biomonitoring with eDNA: Can metabarcoding of water samples cut it as a tool for surveying benthic communities? Molecular Ecology. 2021; 30: 3175–3188. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.15641 PMID: 32974967

29. Kusanke LM, Panteleit J, Stoll S, Korte E, Su¨ nger E, Schulz R, et al. Detection of the endangered Euro- pean weather loach (Misgurnus fossilis) via water and sediment samples: Testing multiple eDNA work- flows. Ecology and Evolution. 2020; 10: 8331–8344. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6540. 30. Chen X, Li S, Zhao J, Yao M. Passive eDNA sampling facilitates biodiversity monitoring and rare spe- cies detection. Environment International. 2024; 187: 108706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2024. 108706 PMID: 38696978 PLOS ONE Biodiversity and zoobenthos distribution in yellow river estuary wetlands revealed by eDNA metabarcoding PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315346 December 18, 2024 16 / 19