Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25668035›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Metabarcoding is powerful yet still blind: a comparative analysis of morphological and molecular surveys of seagrass communities.

Dominique A Cowart, Miguel Pinheiro, Olivier Mouchel, Marion Maguer, Jacques Grall, Jacques Miné, Sophie Arnaud-Haond

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
36.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 263 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. ZooKeys · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Complete mitochondrial genome and phylogenetic analysis ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Dominique A CowartIFREMER (Institut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la MER), Unité Environnement Profond, Département des Ressources physiques et Ecosystèmes de Fond de mer (REM), B.P. 70, 29280, Plouzané, France.
Miguel PinheiroUniversity of St. Andrews, Medical and Biological Sciences Building, North Haugh, St. Andrews, Fife, KY16 9TF, United Kingdom.
Olivier MouchelIFREMER (Institut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la MER), Unité Environnement Profond, Département des Ressources physiques et Ecosystèmes de Fond de mer (REM), B.P. 70, 29280, Plouzané, France.
Marion MaguerInstitut Universitaire Européen de la Mer (IUEM), Technopôle Brest-Iroiserue Dumont d'Urville, 29280, Plouzané, France.
Jacques GrallInstitut Universitaire Européen de la Mer (IUEM), Technopôle Brest-Iroiserue Dumont d'Urville, 29280, Plouzané, France.
Jacques MinéTotal Exploration & Production, Direction HSE, 2 Place Jean Millier, 92078, Paris la Défense, France.
Sophie Arnaud-HaondIFREMER (Institut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la MER), Unité Environnement Profond, Département des Ressources physiques et Ecosystèmes de Fond de mer (REM), B.P. 70, 29280, Plouzané, France.
Institut Universitaire Européen de la Mer · FRMarine Biodiversity Exploitation and Conservation · FRTotal (France) · FRUniversity of St Andrews · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the context of the sixth wave of extinction, reliable surveys of biodiversity are increasingly needed to infer the cause and consequences of species and community declines, identify early warning indicators of tipping points, and provide reliable impact assessments before engaging in activities with potential environmental hazards. DNA metabarcoding has emerged as having potential to provide speedy assessment of community structure from environmental samples. Here we tested the reliability of metabarcoding by comparing morphological and molecular inventories of invertebrate communities associated with seagrasses through estimates of alpha and beta diversity, as well as the identification of the most abundant taxa. Sediment samples were collected from six Zostera marina seagrass meadows across Brittany, France. Metabarcoding surveys were performed using both mitochondrial (Cytochrome Oxidase I) and nuclear (small subunit 18S ribosomal RNA) markers, and compared to morphological inventories compiled by a long-term benthic monitoring network. A sampling strategy was defined to enhance performance and accuracy of results by preventing the dominance of larger animals, boosting statistical support through replicates, and using two genes to compensate for taxonomic biases. Molecular barcodes proved powerful by revealing a remarkable level of diversity that vastly exceeded the morphological survey, while both surveys identified congruent differentiation of the meadows. However, despite the addition of individual barcodes of common species into taxonomic reference databases, the retrieval of only 36% of these species suggest that the remaining were either not present in the molecular samples or not detected by the molecular screening. This finding exemplifies the necessity of comprehensive and well-curated taxonomic reference libraries and multi-gene surveys. Overall, results offer methodological guidelines and support for metabarcoding as a powerful and repeatable method of characterizing communities, while also presenting suggestions for improvement, including implementation of pilot studies prior to performing full "blind" metabarcoding assessments to optimize sampling and amplification protocols.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiodiversityBiomarkersCell NucleusDNADNA Barcoding, TaxonomicFranceGeologic SedimentsMitochondriaMolecular Sequence DataReproducibility of ResultsRNA, Ribosomal, 18SZosteraceaeBiomarkersDNARNA, Ribosomal, 18S

Identifiers

PMID25668035
PMCPMC4323199
OpenAlexW2107776943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.