Skip to main content
. 2019 Jul 26;7:e7335. doi: 10.7717/peerj.7335

Table 1. Sample richness and heterogeneity under different replicate processing strategies.

MOTUs PCR strategy Richness Sample replicates
Total Average Common (3/3) Shared (2/3) Unique (1/3) Dissimilarity
All Additive (1/3) 1,314 187.3 ± 9.1 41.6 (22.2%) 37.5 (20.0%) 108.2 (57.8%) 0.48 ± 0.01
Relaxed (2/3) 1,034 114.8 ± 5.8 29.3 (25.5%) 23.8 (20.7%) 61.5 (53.8%) 0.45 ± 0.01
Strict (3/3) 788 81.8 ± 4.4 17.6 (21.5%) 18.8 (22.9%) 45.5 (55.6%) 0.46 ± 0.01
Metazoan Additive (1/3) 176 25.0 ± 2.4 18.0 (75.2%) 4.8 (17.5%) 2.3 (10.9%) 0.65 ± 0.01
Relaxed (2/3) 156 19.2 ± 2.3 14.2 (72.2%) 3.8 (17.7%) 1.7 (10.1%) 0.66 ± 0.02
Strict (3/3) 141 15.8 ± 2.2 12.0 (75.2%) 2.6 (17.2%) 1.1 (7.6%) 0.68 ± 0.02

Note:

Total richness of all samples combined, as well as average (mean ± SEM) richness for each of the two locations at each of the 20 time points under different PCR replicate processing strategies (“additive,” “relaxed,” and “strict”), the effects on heterogeneity of MOTUs in the sample replicates and the average Sørenson dissimilarities between the sampling replicates (mean ± SEM). For each of the three strategies, the MOTUs are divided into three categories: (1) those MOTUs that are common and appear in all three sampling replicates; (2) MOTUs that are shared, and occur in two of three replicates; and (3) unique MOTUs, that only occur in a single sample replicate.