Cross-border comparison of mycobiomes in Parmelia and Peltigera lichens from Turkey and South Korea

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3566204/v1

Download PDF

Article

Cross-border comparison of mycobiomes in Parmelia and Peltigera lichens from Turkey and South Korea

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3566204/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Lichens, traditionally considered as a simple partnership primarily between fungi and photobiont, are, in reality, complex ecosystems comprised of a multitude of microorganisms. Endolichenic fungi represent fungi residing within lichen thalli without causing any disease symptoms. Various factors, including the host lichen species and environmental conditions, can influence the structure of the lichen mycobiome. To investigate which factor, host genus or location, has a greater impact on the lichen mycobiome, we conducted a comparative analysis of mycobiomes within Parmelia and Peltigera collected from both Turkey and South Korea, using high-throughput sequencing. In terms of taxonomic diversity, the lichen mycobiome does not show significant differentiation based on host phylogeny or geographical distance, suggesting similar characteristics. Location differences exert a stronger influence on the lichen mycobiome than the host genus. We have identified the core mycobiomes of Parmelia and Peltigera, and these two core mycobiomes share common fungal strains including basidiomycete yeast. Our study enhances our understanding of lichen mycobiomes, shedding light on their taxonomic diversity, the factors influencing their composition, and the core members and specialists within these intricate ecosystems.

Biological sciences/Ecology

Biological sciences/Microbiology

Lichens represent a symbiotic union, primarily involving green algae and/or cyanobacteria ¹. The fungal component, serving as the structural scaffold for the lichen thallus, offers both a sheltered haven for the photosynthetic partner and a means for nutrient exchange ^2,3. Remarkably adaptable, lichens can inhabit a broad spectrum of terrestrial environments, spanning from arid deserts to polar regions ^4,5, and have gained recognition as essential bioindicators of environmental dynamics, manifesting sensitivity to alterations in air quality and fluctuations in climate ^6,7.

Lichens, traditionally viewed as a simple partnership primarily between fungi and photobiont, are in fact intricate ecosystems composed of a myriad of microorganisms ⁸. Endolichenic fungi (ELF), denoting fungi residing within lichen thalli without inducing any disease symptoms, are taxonomically diverse ⁹. They have been discovered in virtually all lichen species investigated thus far, representing an array of taxonomic groups, with many yet to be formally described ¹⁰. Consequently, ELF constitute a relatively underexplored facet of fungal diversity, sparking interest for their capacity to produce secondary metabolites endowed with diverse biological activities ¹¹. Consequently, delving into the intricacies of lichen mycobiome is not only an exercise in uncovering their species diversity and distribution but is also crucial for unveiling their ecological functions and interactions. This knowledge stands to bolster the promotion of sustainable ecosystems and their associated ecological benefits.

Multiple factors, encompassing the host lichen species and environmental conditions can exert influence on the structure of ELF communities ⁹. Recently, our research revealed that, within South Korea, the lichen mycobiome is more profoundly shaped by geographical variations rather than the lichen host haplotype ¹². To gain a broader perspective, we expanded our investigation to an international scale. In an effort to bridge this gap in knowledge, we conducted a comparative analysis of mycobiomes within Parmelia and Peltigera lichen species collected from similar geographical locations in both Turkey and South Korea based on high-throughput sequencing with internal transcribed spacer region amplification. Our analysis of the lichen mycobiome centered on three specific inquiries: First, we aimed to understand the overall taxonomic diversity within the mycobiome. Second, we sought to determine whether host phylogeny or geographic distance had a more pronounced influence on the mycobiome structure. Lastly, we aimed to identify the core members and specialists within the mycobiome, guided by the factors revealed in our investigation.

Lichen host phylogeny

Phylogenetic analysis based on ITS sequence data revealed that all the samples we gathered belong to the genera Parmelia and Peltigera (Supplementary Fig. S1). The Parmelia samples collected in Turkey represented a single species, P. submontana, while the Parmelia samples from Korea were identified as P. praesquarrosa. Our Peltigera samples were shown to encompass a total of four distinct species. The Peltigera species from Turkey included Peltigera aff. neocanina, Peltigera aff. membranacea, P. degenii, and P. praetextata. In contrast, all Peltigera samples from Korea were identified as P. degenii. In summary, Parmelia samples from Turkey and Korea each represented a single species, while the Peltigera samples collected in Turkey showed greater species diversity compared to those from Korea.

Taxonomic diversity of lichen mycobiome

In order to assess the overall diversity of the fungal community within lichens, we observed the taxonomic composition (Fig. 1a). At the phylum level, except for unclassified fungi, members of Ascomycota (40%) ere the most abundant, with fungi belonging to Basidiomycota (24%) following. At the class level, Dothideomycetes (21%) were the dominant group, followed by Tremellomycetes (20%) and Eurotiomycetes (8%). We investigated whether the taxonomic composition of the lichen mycobiome varied based on host type at the order level (Fig. 1b). There were no significant differences in diversity observed among the four host types: Korean Parmelia and Peltigera, and Turkish Parmelia and Peltigera. When compared across countries, the proportion of Pleosporales was higher in the Turkish lichen mycobiome (8%) than Korean’s (3%), regardless of host species.

To understand the factors influencing the clustering of the lichen mycobiome, we observed a hierarchical heatmap of the top 100 abundant ASVs based on host lichen genus and geographical differences (Fig. 1c). It was not clear which of these two factors had a greater impact on the clustering. This suggests that additional analysis is needed to clearly identify the factors shaping the fungal community. To summarize, it can be concluded that the lichen mycobiome, in terms of taxonomic diversity, does not exhibit significant differentiation based on host phylogeny or geographical distance, and it appears to share similar features.

Influential factors in shaping the lichen mycobiome and alpha diversity of the mycobiome

To explore which factor, either the host genus or geographical distance, has a more significant impact on the lichen mycobiome, we conducted a two-dimensional ordination through canonical correspondence analysis (Fig. 2a). It appears that the fungal community is more influenced by location similarity. However, we believed that further statistical testing was necessary and thus performed a variation partitioning analysis (Fig. 2b). While the size of the residual component was substantial (0.97), it conclusively revealed that the lichen mycobiome is more strongly influenced by location (0.02) than by the host (0.01).

We also examined how alpha diversity of the lichen mycobiome varies according to host type. Nestedness is a term used when one group exhibits a subset-like pattern within another group, and it is useful for assessing overall alpha diversity. As shown in the figure, regardless of location, Peltigera mycobiome has a more nested structure compared to fungal community inside Parmelia (Fig. 2c). For Chao1, representing species richness, there were no significant differences between Parmelia and Peltigera mycobiomes across locations (Mann-Whitney U test, p > 0.05, Fig. 2d). Similarly, Shannon index, which signifies species diversity, did not exhibit significant differences based on location (Mann-Whitney U test, p > 0.05). Additionally, there were no notable distinctions in Chao1 and Shannon index when comparing lichen mycobiomes based on their host genera Parmelia and Peltigera (Mann-Whitney U test, p > 0.05, Supplementary Fig. S2a). In summary, the lichen mycobiome is more strongly influenced by location differences than by the host genus, and Peltigera mycobiome appears to have a more nested structure than that of Parmelia.

Core members of the lichen mycobiome

Generally, the term ‘core microbiome’ refers to a set of members that are commonly found within different hosts or samples. In other words, the core mycobiome signifies the fungal strains that appear consistently, regardless of the habitat. We aimed to identify the core mycobiomes within the two genera, Parmelia and Peltigera, utilizing two measures: relative abundance and prevalence (Fig. 3a). As the cutoff values for both measures increased, the number of core members (core size) decreased. When we set the relative abundance cutoff to 0.1%, we discovered 12 core members for Parmelia and 14 core members for Peltigera (Fig. 3b). Interestingly, among the core mycobiomes of the two different lichen hosts, there were several common fungal strains, such as Cutaneotrichosporon debeurmannianum, Chaetothyriales, and Dothideomycetes (Fig. 3c). Among them, the abundance of C. debeurmannianum was relatively high (Fig. 3d). In summary, we have identified the core mycobiomes of Parmelia and Peltigera, and these two core mycobiomes share common fungal strains.

Host or locational specialist in lichen mycobiome

Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) is a useful tool in the field of microbial community analysis for identifying microbial taxa with statistically significant differences in abundance. In our study, we employed LDA to identify host genus or location-specific specialists. We focused on data that were identified at the genus level and had LDA scores of 3.0 or higher, excluding unclassified data such as unclassified family data. In the Parmelia mycobiome, we observed the frequent presence of eleven taxa, including Didymella fabae and Gyrographa gyrocarpa in lichens from Turkey (Fig. 4a). Conversely, in Korean Parmelia, we found that only Septobasidium carestianum was a specialist. In the Peltigera mycobiome, we confirmed the significant abundance of sixteen taxonomic groups, including Herpotrichia junperi and Mycosphaerella tassina, in Turkish samples (Fig. 4b). Additionally, thirteen taxonomic groups, including Monochaetia junipericola and Cyphellophora, were significantly abundant in Korean Peltigera.

We also investigated lichen mycobiome specialists at the host genus level (Supplementary Fig. S2b). Among Parmelia specialists, three taxonomic groups, including Gyrographa gyrocarpa, were identified, while in Peltigera, 32 unique taxonomic groups, including Phlebia, were significantly more abundant as specialists. In summary, our comparison between Turkish and Korean lichens revealed a higher number of specialists in Turkish lichen communities, and when comparing lichen genera, Peltigera exhibited a greater number of specialists than Parmelia.

In this study, we embarked on an exploration of lichen mycobiomes, aiming to unravel their taxonomic diversity, the influential factors governing their composition, and the identification of core members and specialists. Our findings shed light on several intriguing aspects of lichen mycobiomes and their ecological relevance.

The examination of the lichen mycobiome's taxonomic diversity revealed intriguing insights into the fungal communities within lichens. At the phylum level, the dominance of Ascomycota, followed by Basidiomycota, is consistent with previous studies ^12,13. The prevalence of Dothideomycetes, Eurotiomycetes, Tremellomycetes, and at the class level showcases the importance of these fungal groups in lichen mycobiomes. The orders Capnodiales within Dothideomycetes and Chaetothyriales belonging to Eurotiomycetes have been recognized as major constituents of lichen mycobiomes in previous studies and are part of the endolichenic or lichenicolous groups, and they have been shown not to be transient residents ¹⁴. These groups consist mainly of slow-growing fungi and were not frequently isolated or illuminated when attempting to culture them from lichen samples. However, with the advancement of metabarcoding technology, they have gained significant attention ¹⁴. This fungal group is characterized by a high degree of melanization, a feature that is likely associated with their exceptionally slow growth ^15,16. Fungi that produce melanized cell walls tend to have a sluggish growth rate ¹⁷. As a result, we posit that these fungi exhibit resilience in the harsh lichen microenvironment and are able to sustain a relatively high abundance. Notably, the taxonomic composition did not exhibit significant differentiation based on host phylogeny or geographical distance, indicating shared features within lichen mycobiomes across diverse host types and locations.

An intriguing aspect of our study was the investigation of the factors influencing the composition of lichen mycobiomes. Through a two-dimensional ordination and a variation partitioning analysis, we discerned that geographical location had a more substantial impact on the fungal community than the host genus. This observation aligns with recent research, which also highlighted the significance of geographic variations in shaping lichen mycobiomes ^9,12. The finding of shared lichenicolous fungi among taxonomically diverse lichens within the same habitat further corroborates the earlier discoveries ¹⁴. Geographical variations, including climate, elevation, and local microenvironments, can influence the availability of fungal partners and resources, thereby driving the differentiation of lichen mycobiomes. Further exploration of the specific environmental parameters that underlie these geographical differences is essential for a more comprehensive understanding of lichen mycobiome ecology.

The identification of core members and specialists within lichen mycobiomes adds depth to our understanding of the key constituents in these ecosystems. The presence of common fungal strains within the core mycobiomes of Parmelia and Peltigera, despite different host genera and geographical locations, suggests the existence of functional groups that transcend these boundaries. The presence of common core members, such as Cutaneotrichosporon debeurmannianum, Chaetothyriales, and Dothideomycetes, underscores their adaptability and versatility in lichen symbioses. The prevalence of Dothideomycetes and Eurotiomycetes within lichen communities, as previously described, has been well-documented in several studies ^12–14. However, the unexpected discovery of C. debeurmannianum as a core member of lichen communities in this study is noteworthy. This fungus, which has previously been isolated as a rare basidiomycete yeast, has been found in clinical samples, including cases of diabetic foot infections ^18,19. Previously, Spribille's research garnered attention by molecularly demonstrating the presence of basidiomycete yeasts in various lichens ²⁰. However, these strains belong to the genus Cystobasidium and are phylogenetically distant from the Cutaneotrichosporon identified in this study. There is a need for further research to elucidate the ecological niche of this fungus within the lichen thallus. Our exploration of specialists within the lichen mycobiome unveiled notable differences between Turkish and Korean lichens, as well as disparities between Parmelia and Peltigera. Understanding the functions of these specialists and their interactions with lichen hosts remains an intriguing avenue for future research.

Our findings have important implications for the ecology of lichen mycobiomes. The consistent taxonomic diversity across host genera and geographic locations suggests a level of adaptability and resilience in lichen mycobiomes. This adaptability may be pivotal for their role as bioindicators, as they can withstand variations in environmental conditions and reflect ecological changes through their mycobiome composition. Furthermore, the prevalence of geographical influence on lichen mycobiome composition highlights the need to consider regional variations when studying and conserving lichen communities. To promote the sustainable functioning of ecosystems, it is crucial to acknowledge the pivotal role of lichen mycobiomes in nutrient cycling, carbon fixation, and environmental resilience.

In conclusion, our study advances our understanding of lichen mycobiomes, uncovering their taxonomic diversity, the factors that shape their composition, and the core members and specialists within these intricate ecosystems. Further research is warranted to explore the ecological roles of these fungal communities and their responses to changing environmental conditions, contributing to the preservation of these essential and often overlooked components of terrestrial ecosystems.

Lichen sampling

In the year 2022, we conducted lichen collection at two distinct locations: Uludag Mountain in Turkey's Bursa Province and Hanla Mountain in Jeju Island (South Korea). We gathered samples of both Parmelia and Peltigera species, collecting four samples each of Parmelia and Peltigera from both the Turkish and South Korean sites. These 16 lichen thalli were further subdivided into four pieces each to facilitate bioreplication testing, resulting in a total of 64 samples for subsequent analysis. After collection, the samples were delicately placed into collection bags and transported to the laboratory. They were subsequently stored in an ultra-low temperature freezer until further experiments were conducted.

Morphological identification of each lichen sample was performed directly in the field, and subsequent molecular identification was carried out based on the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region in our laboratory. The lichen thalli, obtained during this study, were dissected into 1 cm² pieces, with any surface residues removed through a combination of syringe tip extraction and thorough washing with running tap water. Following this initial preparation, the lichen thalli surfaces were sterilized using a solution of 70% ethanol and 0.4% sodium hypochlorite according to Yang's protocol ²¹, with the sterilization process lasting for 90 seconds. This method was employed to isolate fungi from lichens, but we anticipate that the running tap and ethanol treatment processes might help remove some of the DNA from other fungi present on the lichen surface. Furthermore, even if a small amount of epiphytic fungal DNA is included in the subsequent data, we believe it will be negligible compared to the portion occupied by the fungal community's DNA within the thallus.

Molecular and bioinformatics analyses

The lichen segments underwent homogenization through bead lysis, and their DNA was subsequently extracted using the PowerSoil DNA isolation kit (QIAGEN, CA, USA). By amplifying the ITS region of the extracted DNA, we conducted a phylogeny test for the host lichen. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) conditions were as follows: an initial denaturation step at 94°C for 5 minutes, followed by 35 cycles of 94°C for 30 seconds, 55°C for 30 seconds, and 72°C for 40 seconds, with a final extension at 72°C for 10 minutes. We entrusted Macrogen (Seoul, South Korea) with Sanger sequencing to obtain the ITS sequences amplified with primers ITS4 and ITS5 ²², which were subsequently aligned using the MAFFT ver. 7 ²³. Through a phylogenetic model test conducted with MEGA ver. 7 ²⁴, we confirmed that our samples were best suited to the Tamura’s 3-parameter + G + I model ²⁵. Based on this model, we obtained a maximum likelihood ²⁶ phylogeny with 1000 bootstrap iterations. The visualization of host lichen phylogeny was conducted using iTOL ²⁷.

We proceeded with PCR targeting the fungal ITS1 region [14] for metabarcoding. We employed primers ITS1F and ITS2 ²⁸, incorporating Illumina sequencing adaptors. PCR was carried out in triplicate for each sample, utilizing the AccuPower PCR PreMix kit (Bioneer, Daejeon, South Korea), under the following conditions: an initial denaturation step at 94°C for 5 minutes, followed by 25 cycles of 94°C for 30 seconds, 55°C for 30 seconds, and 72°C for 40 seconds, with a final extension at 72°C for 10 minutes. The quality of the PCR products was assessed using agarose gel electrophoresis, followed by purification with the Expin PCR SV kit (GeneAll, Seoul, South Korea). A second PCR was conducted for barcoding, incorporating multiple index delimiters as per the Nextera XT Index kit protocol (Illumina, CA, USA). Amplicon concentration was determined using the NanoDrop2000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA, USA), and PCR products were pooled in equal molecular quantities. Subsequently, amplicon library sequencing was executed on an Illumina MiSeq platform by Macrogen (Seoul, South Korea).

Raw sequences underwent initial processing using QIIME2 ver. 2021.4 ²⁹, including demultiplexing and denoising reads following the DADA2 pipeline ³⁰. Taxonomic assignment was executed in accordance with the Naïve Bayesian classifier guidelines ³¹, utilizing the UNITE fungi 99% OTU database ³². A phylogenetic analysis was conducted employing the q2-alignment plugin based on RAxML ³³. All sequencing data were deposited in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), Sequence Read Archive, under the accession number PRJNA1035977. The amplicon sequence variant (ASV) ³⁴ table was imported from QIIME2 to R using the 'qiime2R' package (https://github.com/jbisanz/qiime2R). Host lichen sequences were filtered out, and the ASV table was rarefied to 1,800 sequences per lichen host for comparison in equal standard using the 'phyloseq' package ³⁵. In this procedure, ten samples were omitted. Subsequent analyses were conducted using the rarefied ASV table.

Statistics and visualization

To begin the statistical comparisons, we initially applied the Shapiro test ³⁶ to assess data normality. Given the violation of normality assumptions, non-parametric tests were employed, including the Mann–Whitney U test ³⁷ for pairwise comparisons and the Kruskal-Wallis test ³⁸ followed by the Bonferroni correction ³⁹ for multiple comparisons.

All subsequent analyses were conducted using R software version 3.5.3 ⁴⁰. Visualization of all graphs was carried out using the 'ggplot2' package. For the creation of hierarchical heatmap depicting the distribution of the top 100 abundant ASVs, the 'pheatmap' package was employed. To showcase the two-dimensional distribution of the lichen mycobiome, we utilized the 'microbiome' package for canonical correspondence analysis ordination ⁴¹. Variation partitioning and nestedness visualization were generated using the 'vegan' package. Identification of the core mycobiome was accomplished using the 'microbiome' package, and specialist testing was conducted by employing linear discriminant analysis based on the 'microbial' package.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported under the framework of international cooperation program (Turkey and Korea) managed by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2021K2A9A1A06086000).

Author contributions

J.Y., C.S., and J.-S.H. designed the ideas. J.-J.W., C.S, B.G., B.A., T.I.B., G.K., and J.-S.H. did sample collection. J.Y. and B.G. analyzed the data. J.Y. performed visualization. J.Y. and J.-S.H. wrote and revised the manuscript.

Data availability statement

All data are accessible on Sequence Read Archive (PRJNA1035977), NCBI.

Additional Information

The authors declare no competing interests.

Hawksworth, D. L. The variety of fungal-algal symbioses, their evolutionary significance, and the nature of lichens. Botanical journal of the Linnean Society 96, 3–20 (1988).
Honegger, R. The lichen symbiosis—what is so spectacular about it? The Lichenologist 30, 193–212 (1998).
Smith, D., Muscatine, L. & Lewis, D. Carbohydrate movement from autotrophs to heterotrophs in parasitic and mutualistic symbiosis. Biological Reviews 44, 17–85 (1969).
Nash III, T. H., White, S. L. & Marsh, J. E. Lichen and moss distribution and biomass in hot desert ecosystems. Bryologist 470–479 (1977).
Søchting, U. & Olech, M. The lichen genus Caloplaca in polar regions. The Lichenologist 27, 463–471 (1995).
Bačkor, M. & Loppi, S. Interactions of lichens with heavy metals. Biologia plantarum 53, 214–222 (2009).
Yang, J., Oh, S.-O. & Hur, J.-S. Lichen as Bioindicators: Assessing their Response to Heavy Metal Pollution in Their Native Ecosystem. Mycobiology 51, 343–353 (2023).
Allen, J. L. & Lendemer, J. C. A call to reconceptualize lichen symbioses. Trends in Ecology & Evolution (2022).
U’Ren, J. M., Lutzoni, F., Miadlikowska, J., Laetsch, A. D. & Arnold, A. E. Host and geographic structure of endophytic and endolichenic fungi at a continental scale. American journal of botany 99, 898–914 (2012).
Suryanarayanan, T. S. & Thirunavukkarasu, N. Endolichenic fungi: the lesser known fungal associates of lichens. Mycology 8, 189–196 (2017).
Kellogg, J. J. & Raja, H. A. Endolichenic fungi: a new source of rich bioactive secondary metabolites on the horizon. Phytochemistry reviews 16, 271–293 (2017).
Yang, J., Woo, J.-J., Kim, W., Oh, S.-Y. & Hur, J.-S. Exploring the influence of climatic variables on mycobiome composition and community diversity in lichens: insights from structural equation modeling analysis. Environmental Microbiome 18, 79 (2023).
Yang, J., Woo, J.-J., Oh, S.-Y., Kim, W. & Hur, J.-S. Fungal community inside lichen: a curious case of sparse diversity and high modularity. Environmental Microbiome 18, 73 (2023).
Fernández-Mendoza, F., Fleischhacker, A., Kopun, T., Grube, M. & Muggia, L. ITS 1 metabarcoding highlights low specificity of lichen mycobiomes at a local scale. Molecular Ecology 26, 4811–4830 (2017).
Crous, P. W. et al. Phylogenetic lineages in the Capnodiales. Studies in mycology 64, 17–47 (2009).
Teixeira, M. de M. et al. Exploring the genomic diversity of black yeasts and relatives (Chaetothyriales, Ascomycota). Studies in mycology 86, 1–28 (2017).
Vember, V. V. & Zhdanova, N. N. Peculiarities of linear growth of the melanin-containing fungi Cladosporium sphaerospermum Penz. and Alternaria alternata (Fr.) Keissler. Mikrobiolohichnyi Zhurnal (Kiev, Ukraine: 1993) 63, 3–12 (2001).
Nath, R., Sargiary, P., Borkakoty, B. & Parida, P. Cutaneotrichosporon (Trichosporon) debeurmannianum: A Rare Yeast Isolated from Blood and Urine Samples. Mycopathologia 183, 585–590 (2018).
Yoo, I. Y., Heo, W., Kwon, J. A., Lee, M. & Park, Y. Identification of the rare yeast Cutaneotrichosporon (Trichosporon) debeurmannianum from diabetic foot infection. Clinical Laboratory Analysis 36, e24785 (2022).
Spribille, T. et al. Basidiomycete yeasts in the cortex of ascomycete macrolichens. Science 353, 488–492 (2016).
Yang, J. H. et al. Effect of isolation conditions on diversity of endolichenic fungal communities from a foliose lichen, Parmotrema tinctorum. Journal of Fungi 7, 335 (2021).
Bellemain, E. et al. ITS as an environmental DNA barcode for fungi: an in silico approach reveals potential PCR biases. BMC Microbiol 10, 189 (2010).
Katoh, K. & Standley, D. M. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Molecular biology and evolution 30, 772–780 (2013).
Kumar, S., Stecher, G. & Tamura, K. MEGA7: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Molecular biology and evolution 33, 1870–1874 (2016).
Tamura, K. et al. MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Molecular biology and evolution 28, 2731–2739 (2011).
Myung, I. J. Tutorial on maximum likelihood estimation. Journal of mathematical Psychology 47, 90–100 (2003).
Letunic, I. & Bork, P. Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL): an online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation. Bioinformatics 23, 127–128 (2007).
White, T. J., Bruns, T., Lee, S. & Taylor, J. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications 18, 315–322 (1990).
Hall, M. & Beiko, R. G. 16S rRNA gene analysis with QIIME2. Microbiome analysis: methods and protocols 113–129 (2018).
Callahan, B. J. et al. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nature methods 13, 581–583 (2016).
Yang, F.-J. An implementation of naive bayes classifier. in 2018 International conference on computational science and computational intelligence (CSCI) 301–306 (IEEE, 2018).
Abarenkov, K. et al. The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi–recent updates and future perspectives. The New Phytologist 186, 281–285 (2010).
Stamatakis, A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30, 1312–1313 (2014).
Maruyama, H., Masago, A., Nambu, T., Mashimo, C. & Okinaga, T. Amplicon sequence variant-based oral microbiome analysis using QIIME 2. Journal of Osaka Dental University 54, 273–281 (2020).
McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PloS one 8, e61217 (2013).
Royston, P. Approximating the Shapiro-Wilk W-test for non-normality. Statistics and computing 2, 117–119 (1992).
Ruxton, G. D. The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to Student’s t-test and the Mann–Whitney U test. Behavioral Ecology 17, 688–690 (2006).
Vargha, A. & Delaney, H. D. The Kruskal-Wallis test and stochastic homogeneity. Journal of Educational and behavioral Statistics 23, 170–192 (1998).
Armstrong, R. A. When to use the B onferroni correction. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics 34, 502–508 (2014).
Ihaka, R. & Gentleman, R. R: a language for data analysis and graphics. Journal of computational and graphical statistics 5, 299–314 (1996).
Ter Braak, C. J. F. & Verdonschot, P. F. M. Canonical correspondence analysis and related multivariate methods in aquatic ecology. Aquatic Science 57, 255–289 (1995).

No competing interests reported.

SupplementaryInformation.zip

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Cross-border comparison of mycobiomes in Parmelia and Peltigera lichens from Turkey and South Korea

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Results

Discussion

Methods

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1