Skip to main content
. 2018 May 14;65(6):828–842. doi: 10.1111/jeu.12524

Table 1.

Detection of Aquavolonida 18S rRNA phylotypes in various habitat types using two different PCR strategies. Dashes indicate that the primer strategy did not amplify Aquavolonida from that habitat type

Habitat type PCR strategy I – ‘core’ Aquavolonida PCR strategy II – general Aquavolonida diversity
Positive samples Positive samples Aquavolonida lineage(s) detected
Marine sediment 0 of 32 0 of 32
Marine plankton 0 of 32 0 of 32
Estuarine gradient 1 of 16a 0 of 16
Soils 0 of 16b 11 of 16 NC10‐D (94% of clones) and NC10‐B (6% of clones)
Freshwater sediment 8 of 16 14 of 16 NC10‐A (63% of clones) and NC10‐B (37% of clones)
Freshwater river biofilm 7 of 8 7 of 8 NC10‐A (80% of clones) and NC10‐B (20% of clones)
Freshwater plankton 16 of 16 16 of 16 NC10‐A (67% of clones) and NC10‐B (33% of clones)
a

The only positive sample was from the freshwater end of the estuarine gradient.

b

On soil samples this PCR strategy can generate false positives (amplification of lobose amoebae with the primers used in the first PCR).