Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28947818›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Ecosystem biomonitoring with eDNA: metabarcoding across the tree of life in a tropical marine environment.

Michael Stat, Megan J Huggett, Rachele Bernasconi, Joseph D DiBattista, Tina E Berry, Stephen J Newman, Euan S Harvey, Michael Bunce

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

131 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A tailored MoSNational science review · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

71 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

8 authors.

Michael StatTrace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, Department of Environment and Agriculture, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia. michael.stat@curtin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-1663-3422
Megan J HuggettCentre for Marine Ecosystems Research, School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Perth, WA, 6027, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3401-0704
Rachele BernasconiCentre for Marine Ecosystems Research, School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Perth, WA, 6027, Australia.
Joseph D DiBattistaTrace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, Department of Environment and Agriculture, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5696-7574
Tina E BerryTrace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, Department of Environment and Agriculture, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia.
Stephen J NewmanTrace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, Department of Environment and Agriculture, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia.
Euan S HarveyTrace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, Department of Environment and Agriculture, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9069-4581
Michael BunceTrace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, Department of Environment and Agriculture, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective marine management requires comprehensive data on the status of marine biodiversity. However, efficient methods that can document biodiversity in our oceans are currently lacking. Environmental DNA (eDNA) sourced from seawater offers a new avenue for investigating the biota in marine ecosystems. Here, we investigated the potential of eDNA to inform on the breadth of biodiversity present in a tropical marine environment. Directly sequencing eDNA from seawater using a shotgun approach resulted in only 0.34% of 22.3 million reads assigning to eukaryotes, highlighting the inefficiency of this method for assessing eukaryotic diversity. In contrast, using 'tree of life' (ToL) metabarcoding and 20-fold fewer sequencing reads, we could detect 287 families across the major divisions of eukaryotes. Our data also show that the best performing 'universal' PCR assay recovered only 44% of the eukaryotes identified across all assays, highlighting the need for multiple metabarcoding assays to catalogue biodiversity. Lastly, focusing on the fish genus Lethrinus, we recovered intra- and inter-specific haplotypes from seawater samples, illustrating that eDNA can be used to explore diversity beyond taxon identifications. Given the sensitivity and low cost of eDNA metabarcoding we advocate this approach be rapidly integrated into biomonitoring programs.

Indexed as

AnimalsAquatic OrganismsDNAEnvironmental MonitoringMetagenomicsSeawaterSensitivity and SpecificitySequence Analysis, DNATropical ClimateDNA

Identifiers

PMID28947818
PMCPMC5612959

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.