DNA metabarcoding data of arthropods from lower mountain range regions in southwest Germany

The dataset comprises presence data on arthropods, but also on the groups 'Annelida', 'Ascomycota', 'Basidiomycota', 'Mollusca', 'Mucoromycota', 'Nematoda' and 'Proteobacteria'. For each detection of an Observational Taxonomic Unit (OTU), the number of reads is also given, as well as further information about the species assigned. The species information was derived from a comparison of the detected DNA sequences with the BOLD database and the database of the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). Further, the Ribosomal Database Project (RDP) classifier was used to identify species. A consensus taxonomy compiles the species information dervied from the different databases and ranks the results according to their validity by using labels from A to C (Information on A, B, and C given at the description of the variables). The DNA metabarcoding process is decribed in detail in Uhler et al (2021): Relationship of insect biomass and richness with land use along a climate gradient (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-26181-3#Sec10 ). Since the samples were devided into large and small subsamples to improve the metabarcoding results, the data is given for each of the subsamples separately. The samples that went through DNA metabarcoding were derived from a Malaise trap experiment, for which five different types of Malaise traps were placed on a meadow and a forest clearing site each in three regions of southwest Germany (Nationalpark Hunsrück-Hochwald, Rhine-Main-Observatory, Steigerwald). The sites in the Hunsrück and the Rhine-Main-Observatory are part of the Long-term Ecological Research Network Germany (LTER-D). The Malaise trap samples comprise insects captured over 14 days each. There is a detailled description of the study design available in Hoffmann et al (2025): Effects of species traits on the catchability of butterflies with different types of Malaise traps and implications for total catch biomass (DOI:10.1007/s10841-024-00645-5). The traps were operated from April to October, but only selected samples went to the DNA metabarcoding (data in this set).