Molecular Identification of Dominant Fish Species Using DNA Barcoding from Two Different Ecosystems of Sindhudurga.
Main Article Content
Abstract
DNA barcoding has emerged as a universal molecular tool for accurate species identification using mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene sequences. This study focuses on identifying dominant fish species from two distinct aquatic ecosystems of sindhudurga - lentic (lake) and lotic (river) environments located in of Tarkarli village of Malvan taluka & Sindhudurg district of Maharashtra, India. Fish samples were collected from Chorage wadi lake (16.082126°N, 73.724685°E) and the Karli River near Sateri Temple (16.043124°N, 73.69119°E). Genomic DNA was extracted using the CTAB method, and the COI gene was amplified and sequenced using Sanger sequencing. The sequences were analyzed through BLAST (Basic Local Alignment Search Tool) to confirm taxonomic identity by comparison with reference sequences in GenBank. Three dominant species — Eleotris fusca, Aplocheilus lineatus, and Rasbora daniconius — were identified with >98% sequence similarity and deposited under GenBank accession numbers PV235273–PV235275. These findings reaffirm the effectiveness of DNA barcoding as a rapid, reliable method for species identification, offering essential data for biodiversity monitoring and ecosystem management in freshwater and semi estuarine habitats.
Article Details
Section
How to Cite
References
1. Panja S, Podder A, Homechaudhuri S. Evaluation of aquatic ecological systems through dynamics of ichthyofaunal diversity in a Himalayan torrential river, Murti. Limnologica. 2020;82(March):125779. doi:10.1016/j.limno.2020.125779
2. Walton LN, Quindazzi M, Gauthier S, Stevens C. Fish ID face-off: A comparison of genetic barcoding and otolith shape analysis for streamlining species identification of mesopelagic fishes. Fish Res. 2025;281(May 2024). doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2024.107254
3. Arif IA, Khan HA, Shobrak M, Williams J. Cytochrome c oxidase subunit I barcoding of the green bee-eater (Merops orientalis). Genet Mol Res. 2011;10(4):3992-3998. doi:10.4238/2011.October.21.2
4. Theissinger K, Fernandes C, Formenti G, et al. How genomics can help biodiversity conservation. Trends Genet. 2023;39(7):545-559. doi:10.1016/j.tig.2023.01.005
5. Trivedi S. Role of DNA barcoding in marine biodiversity assessment and conservation : An update. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2016;23(2):161-171. doi:10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.01.001
6. Quiñones KJO, Gentallan RP, Timog EBS, et al. Liquid-nitrogen-free CTAB DNA extraction method from silica-dried specimens for next-generation sequencing and assembly. MethodsX. 2024;12(May):10-17. doi:10.1016/j.mex.2024.102758
7. Gusmao ACB, van Dijk RL, Girard EB, et al. Exploring the potential of the COI gene marker for DNA barcoding of planktonic foraminifera. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):1-10. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-03842-7
8. Panprommin D, Soontornprasit K, Tuncharoen S, Pithakpol S, Keereelang J. DNA barcodes for the identification of species diversity in fish from Kwan Phayao, Thailand. J Asia-Pacific Biodivers. 2019;12(3):382-389. doi:10.1016/j.japb.2019.05.003
9. Kundu S, Chandra K, Tyagi K, Pakrashi A, Kumar V. DNA barcoding of freshwater fishes from Brahmaputra River in Eastern Himalaya biodiversity hotspot. Mitochondrial DNA Part B Resour. 2019;4(2):2411-2419. doi:10.1080/23802359.2019.1637290
10. Nahavandi R. Fish DNA barcoding: A review. Int J Biol Reports. 2024;2(2):17-33.
11. Jennings WB, Ruschi PA, Ferraro G, et al. Barcoding the Neotropical freshwater fish fauna using a new pair of universal COI primers with a discussion of primer dimers and M13 primer tails. Genome. 2019;62(2):77-83. doi:10.1139/gen-2018-0145
12. Uno H, Utsumi S, Morita K, Kishida O, Alam MK, Negishi J. Hydrological Connectivity and Local Environment Alternately Drive Spatial Structure of Floodplain Aquatic Community Across Seasons. Ecol Evol. 2025;15(2). doi:10.1002/ece3.70880
13. Qiu J, Yuan S, Tang H, Deng Y, Gualtieri C. Hydrodynamic Responses of Fish Community Dynamics in Large-Scale Morphologically Complex River Systems. Water Resour Res. 2025;61(7). doi:10.1029/2025WR040690
14. Mennesson MI, Tabouret H, Pécheyran C, Feunteun E, Keith P. Amphidromous life cycle of Eleotris fusca (Gobioidei: Eleotridae), a widespread species from the Indo-Pacific studied by otolith analyses. Cybium. 2015;39(4):249-260.
15. Darshan A, Abujam S, Das DN. Systematic Account. Vol 37.; 2019. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-815556-1.00004-2
16. Çevik T, Çevik N. Environmental DNA (eDNA): A review of ecosystem biodiversity detection and applications. Biodivers Conserv. 2025;34(9):2999-3035. doi:10.1007/s10531-025-03112-y
17. Kumar G, Reaume AM, Farrell E, Gaither MR. Comparing eDNA metabarcoding primers for assessing fish communities in a biodiverse estuary. PLoS One. 2022;17(6 June):1-20. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0266720
18. Baena-Bejarano N, Reina C, Martínez-Revelo DE, et al. Taxonomic identification accuracy from BOLD and GenBank databases using over a thousand insect DNA barcodes from Colombia. PLoS One. 2023;18(4 4):1-19. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0277379
19. Alam M, Abbas K, Usmani N, et al. A Comprehensive review on DNA barcoding for species identification across diverse taxa. Munis Entomol Zool J. 2024;19(2):1057-1072. https://www.munisentzool.org/
20. Nanni L, Cuza D, Brahnam S. AI-Powered Biodiversity Assessment: Species Classification via DNA Barcoding and Deep Learning. Technologies. 2024;12(12):1-15. doi:10.3390/technologies12120240
21. Kawato M, Yoshida T, Miya M, et al. Optimization of environmental DNA extraction and amplification methods for metabarcoding of deep-sea fish. MethodsX. 2021;8:101238. doi:10.1016/j.mex.2021.101238
22. Rathipriya A, Karal Marx K, Jeyashakila R. Molecular identification and phylogenetic relationship of flying fishes of Tamil Nadu coast for fishery management purposes. Mitochondrial DNA Part A DNA Mapping, Seq Anal. 2019;30(3):500-510. doi:10.1080/24701394.2018.1558220
23. Jabot F, Auger G, Bonnal P, et al. Use of massive DNA barcoding to monitor biodiversity: A test on forest soil macrofauna. For Ecol Manage. 2025;595(July). doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2025.123004
24. Zhou Y, Trujillo-González A, Nicol S, Huerlimann R, Sarre SD, Gleeson D. Evaluation of DNA barcoding reference databases for marine species in the western and central Pacific Ocean. PeerJ. 2025;13:1-25. doi:10.7717/peerj.19674
25. Shelake SK, Deshpande VY. Dna Barcoding of Fish Diversity From Indian Riverine Ecosystem: a Review Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology Dna Barcoding of Fish Diversity From Indian Riverine Ecosystem: a Review. 2021;(January). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357524896
26. Nielsen ES, Hanson JO, Carvalho SB, et al. Molecular ecology meets systematic conservation planning. Trends Ecol Evol. 2023;38(2):143-155. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2022.09.006
27. Chakraborty M, Ghosh SK. An assessment of the DNA barcodes of Indian freshwater fishes. Gene. 2014;537(1):20-28. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2013.12.047
28. Derocles SAP, Bohan DA, Dumbrell AJ, et al. Biomonitoring for the 21st Century: Integrating Next-Generation Sequencing Into Ecological Network Analysis. Adv Ecol Res. 2018;58:1-62. doi:10.1016/bs.aecr.2017.12.001