Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30271554›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2018

A comparative analysis of metabarcoding and morphology-based identification of benthic communities across different regional seas.

Abigail E Cahill, John K Pearman, Angel Borja, Laura Carugati, Susana Carvalho, Roberto Danovaro, Sarah Dashfield, Romain David, Jean-Pierre Féral, Sergej Olenin and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

15 authors.

Abigail E CahillInstitut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Ecologie marine et continentale (IMBE) Aix Marseille Univ Avignon Université, CNRS IRD IMBE Marseille France.ORCID 0000-0002-3984-7212
John K PearmanKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) Red Sea Research Center Thuwal Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-2237-9723
Angel BorjaAZTI Marine Research Division Herrera Kaia Pasaia Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1601-2025
Laura CarugatiStazione Zoologica "A. Dohrn", Villa Comunale Napoli Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0921-6911
Susana CarvalhoKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) Red Sea Research Center Thuwal Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-1300-1953
Roberto DanovaroDipartimento di Scienze della Vita e dell'Ambiente Università Politecnica delle Marche Ancona Italy.
Sarah DashfieldPlymouth Marine Laboratory Plymouth UK.
Romain DavidInstitut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Ecologie marine et continentale (IMBE) Aix Marseille Univ Avignon Université, CNRS IRD IMBE Marseille France.ORCID 0000-0003-4073-7456
Jean-Pierre FéralInstitut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Ecologie marine et continentale (IMBE) Aix Marseille Univ Avignon Université, CNRS IRD IMBE Marseille France.ORCID 0000-0001-7627-0160
Sergej OleninMarine Research Institute Klaipėda University Klaipėda Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0002-0773-1442
Andrius ŠiaulysMarine Research Institute Klaipėda University Klaipėda Lithuania.
Paul J SomerfieldPlymouth Marine Laboratory Plymouth UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7581-5621
Antoaneta TrayanovaNikola Vaptsarov Naval Academy Varna Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-4158-1230
Maria C UyarraAZTI Marine Research Division Herrera Kaia Pasaia Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4509-3346
Anne ChenuilInstitut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Ecologie marine et continentale (IMBE) Aix Marseille Univ Avignon Université, CNRS IRD IMBE Marseille France.ORCID 0000-0001-8141-7147

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a world of declining biodiversity, monitoring is becoming crucial. Molecular methods, such as metabarcoding, have the potential to rapidly expand our knowledge of biodiversity, supporting assessment, management, and conservation. In the marine environment, where hard substrata are more difficult to access than soft bottoms for quantitative ecological studies, Artificial Substrate Units (ASUs) allow for standardized sampling. We deployed ASUs within five regional seas (Baltic Sea, Northeast Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea, and Red Sea) for 12-26 months to measure the diversity and community composition of macroinvertebrates. We identified invertebrates using a traditional approach based on morphological characters, and by metabarcoding of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I (COI) gene. We compared community composition and diversity metrics obtained using the two methods. Diversity was significantly correlated between data types. Metabarcoding of ASUs allowed for robust comparisons of community composition and diversity, but not all groups were successfully sequenced. All locations were significantly different in taxonomic composition as measured with both kinds of data. We recovered previously known regional biogeographical patterns in both datasets (e.g., low species diversity in the Black and Baltic Seas, affinity between the Bay of Biscay and the Mediterranean). We conclude that the two approaches provide complementary information and that metabarcoding shows great promise for marine monitoring. However, until its pitfalls are addressed, the use of metabarcoding in monitoring of rocky benthic assemblages should be used in addition to classical approaches rather than instead of them.

Indexed as

Artificial Substrate Unit (ASU)COIinnovative monitoringmarine invertebratesmetabarcoding

Identifiers

PMID30271554
PMCPMC6157697

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.