ArticlePeerJ2017
Metabarcoding monitoring analysis: the pros and cons of using co-extracted environmental DNA and RNA data to assess offshore oil production impacts on benthic communities.
Article in PeerJ, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- From environmental DNA into actionable biodiversity data: Towards the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.The Journal of heredity · 2026Review
- Prospects of multipurpose biomonitoring for fisheries assessment based on environmental nucleic acids.Journal of fish biology · 2026Review
- Article
- Review
- New prospects of environmental RNA metabarcoding research in biological diversity, ecotoxicological monitoring, and detection of COVID-19: a critical review.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2024Review
- Elevated atmospheric COBMC microbiology · 2023Article
- Environmental DNA in human and veterinary parasitology - Current applications and future prospects for monitoring and control.Food and waterborne parasitology · 2022Article
- Comparative environmental RNA and DNA metabarcoding analysis of river algae and arthropods for ecological surveys and water quality assessment.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Environmental nucleic acids: A field-based comparison for monitoring freshwater habitats using eDNA and eRNA.Molecular ecology resources · 2022Article
- Environmental RNA as a Tool for Marine Community Biodiversity Assessments.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- RNA allows identifying the consumption of carrion prey.Molecular ecology resources · 2022Article
- Elevated Atmospheric COMicrobial ecology · 2022Article
- In-situ sequencing reveals the effect of storage on lacustrine sediment microbiome demographics and functionality.Environmental microbiome · 2022Article
- Sediment-associated microbial community profiling: sample pre-processing through sequential membrane filtration for 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing.BMC microbiology · 2022Article
- Profile hidden Markov model sequence analysis can help remove putative pseudogenes from DNA barcoding and metabarcoding datasets.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Article
- Metabarcoding on both environmental DNA and RNA highlights differences between fungal communities sampled in different habitats.PloS one · 2020Article
- Environmental DNA from plastic and textile marine litter detects exotic and nuisance species nearby ports.PloS one · 2020Article
- Evaluating putative ecological drivers of microcystin spatiotemporal dynamics using metabarcoding and environmental data.Harmful algae · 2019Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sequencing environmental DNA (eDNA) is increasingly being used as an alternative to traditional morphological-based identification to characterize biological assemblages and monitor anthropogenic impacts in marine environments. Most studies only assess eDNA which, compared to eRNA, can persist longer in the environment after cell death. Therefore, eRNA may provide a more immediate census of the environment due to its relatively weaker stability, leading some researchers to advocate for the use of eRNA as an additional, or perhaps superior proxy for portraying ecological changes. A variety of pre-treatment techniques for screening eDNA and eRNA derived operational taxonomic units (OTUs) have been employed prior to statistical analyses, including removing singleton taxa (i.e., OTUs found only once) and discarding those not present in both eDNA and eRNA datasets. In this study, we used bacterial (16S ribosomal RNA gene) and eukaryotic (18S ribosomal RNA gene) eDNA- and eRNA-derived data from benthic communities collected at increasing distances along a transect from an oil production platform (Taranaki, New Zealand). Macro-infauna (visual classification of benthic invertebrates) and physico-chemical data were analyzed in parallel. We tested the effect of removing singleton taxa, and removing taxa not present in the eDNA and eRNA libraries from the same environmental sample (trimmed by shared OTUs), by comparing the impact of the oil production platform on alpha- and beta-diversity of the eDNA/eRNA-based biological assemblages, and by correlating these to the morphologically identified macro-faunal communities and the physico-chemical data. When trimmed by singletons, presence/absence information from eRNA data represented the best proxy to detect changes on species diversity for both bacteria and eukaryotes. However, assessment of quantitative beta-diversity from read abundance information of bacteria eRNA did not, contrary to eDNA, reveal any impact from the oil production activity. Overall, the data appeared more robust when trimmed by shared OTUs, showing a greater effect of the platform on alpha- and beta-diversity. Trimming by shared OTUs likely removes taxa derived from legacy DNA and technical artefacts introduced through reverse transcriptase, polymerase-chain-reaction and sequencing. Findings from our scoping study suggest that metabarcoding-based biomonitoring surveys should, if funds, time and expertise allow, be assessed using both eDNA and eRNA products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.