ArticlePeerJ2020
Culicidae-centric metabarcoding through targeted use of D2 ribosomal DNA primers.
Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bulk identification of Anophelinae larvae from fishponds using DNA metabarcoding.Acta tropica · 2025Article
- The invasive land flatworm Arthurdendyus triangulatus has repeated sequences in the mitogenome, extra-long cox2 gene and paralogous nuclear rRNA clusters.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Nondestructive Methods of Pathogen Detection: Importance of Mosquito Integrity in Studies of Disease Transmission and Control.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Efficient Monitoring of Adult and Immature Mosquitoes Through Metabarcoding of Bulk Samples: A Case Study for Non-Model Culicids With Unique Ecologies.Journal of medical entomology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A practical limitation to many metabarcoding initiatives is that sampling methods tend to collect many non-target taxa, which become "amplicon noise" that can saturate Next Generation Sequencing results and lead to both financial and resource inefficiencies. An available molecular tool that can significantly decrease these non-target amplicons and decrease the need for pre-DNA-extraction sorting of bycatch is the design of PCR primers tailored to the taxa under investigation. We assessed whether the D2 extension segment of the 28S ribosomal operon can limit this shortcoming within the context of mosquito (Culicidae) monitoring. We designed PCR primers that are fully conserved across mosquitos and exclude from amplification most other taxa likely to be collected with current sampling apparatuses. We show that, given enough sequencing depth, D2 is an effective marker for the detection of mosquito sequences within mock genomic DNA pools. As few as 3,050 quality-filtered Illumina reads were able to recover all 17 species in a bulk pool containing as little as 0.2% of constituent DNA from single taxa. We also mixed these mosquito DNA pools with high concentrations of non-Culicidae bycatch DNA and show that the component mosquito species are generally still recoverable and faithful to their original relative frequencies. Finally, we show that there is little loss of fidelity in abundance parameters when pools from degraded DNA samples were sequenced using the D2 primers.
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.