Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30794582›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Ideating iDNA: Lessons and limitations from leeches in legacy collections.

Mark E Siddall, Megan Barkdull, Michael Tessler, Mercer R Brugler, Elizabeth Borda, Evon Hekkala

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A new subspecies ofParasitology · 2021
    Article
  5. Applied and environmental microbiology · 2021
    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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mark E SiddallDivision of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3977-7517
Megan BarkdullNew College of Florida, Sarasota, Florida, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9334-5726
Michael TesslerDivision of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York, United States of America.
Mercer R BruglerDivision of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3676-1226
Elizabeth BordaDepartment of Science and Math, Texas A&M University San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.
Evon HekkalaDepartment of Biological Sciences, Fordham University, Bronx, New York, United States of America.
American Museum of Natural History · USFordham University · USNew College of Florida · USTexas A&M University – San Antonio · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Indirect methods for conducting faunal inventories present great promise, and genomic inventories derived from environmental sources (eDNA) are improving. Invertebrate ingested DNA (iDNA) from terrestrial leeches in the family Haemadipsidae has shown potential for surveying vertebrates and biodiversity monitoring in protected areas. Here we present an initial, and critical, evaluation of the limitations and biases of current iDNA protocols for biodiversity monitoring using both standard and NGS barcoding approaches. Key findings include the need for taxon relevant multi-locus markers and reference databases. In particular, the limitations of available reference databases have profound potential to mislead and bias eDNA and iDNA results if not critically interpreted. Nevertheless, there is great potential for recovery of amplifiable DNA from gut contents of invertebrate museum specimens which may reveal both temporal patterns and cryptic diversity in protected areas with increased efficiency. Our analyses of ingested DNA (iDNA) from both freshly stored and previously collected (legacy) samples of terrestrial leeches successfully identified vertebrates from Myanmar, Australia and Madagascar and indicate the potential to characterize microbial communities, pathogen diversity and interactions at low cost.

Indexed as

BiodiversityDatabases, Nucleic AcidDNA Barcoding, TaxonomicLeechesVertebratesAnimalsDNADNA

Identifiers

PMID30794582
PMCPMC6386349
OpenAlexW2915241330

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.