Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34518574›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

The critical role of natural history museums in advancing eDNA for biodiversity studies: a case study with Amazonian fishes.

C David de Santana, Lynne R Parenti, Casey B Dillman, Jonathan A Coddington, Douglas A Bastos, Carole C Baldwin, Jansen Zuanon, Gislene Torrente-Vilara, Raphaël Covain, Naércio A Menezes and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

13 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

C David de SantanaDivision of Fishes, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, MRC 159, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, PO Box 37012, Washington, DC, 20013-7012, USA. desantanac@si.edu.
Lynne R ParentiDivision of Fishes, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, MRC 159, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, PO Box 37012, Washington, DC, 20013-7012, USA.
Casey B DillmanCornell University Museum of Vertebrates, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA.
Jonathan A CoddingtonGlobal Genome Initiative, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, PO Box 37012, Washington, DC, 20013-7012, USA.
Douglas A BastosPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Biológicas (BADPI), Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Manaus, Brazil.
Carole C BaldwinDivision of Fishes, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, MRC 159, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, PO Box 37012, Washington, DC, 20013-7012, USA.
Jansen ZuanonCoordenação de Biodiversidade, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil.
Gislene Torrente-VilaraInstituto do Mar, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Campus Baixada Santista, Santos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Raphaël CovainMuseum of Natural History, Department of Herpetology and Ichthyology, route de Malagnou 1, PO Box 6434, 1211, Geneva 6, Switzerland.
Naércio A MenezesMuseu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo (MZUSP), Av. Nazaré, 481, São Paulo, SP, 04263-000, Brazil.
Aléssio DatovoMuseu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo (MZUSP), Av. Nazaré, 481, São Paulo, SP, 04263-000, Brazil.
T SadoNatural History Museum and Institute, Chuo-ku, Chiba, 260-8682, Japan.
M MiyaNatural History Museum and Institute, Chuo-ku, Chiba, 260-8682, Japan.
National Museum of Natural History · USNational Institute of Amazonian Research · BRNatural History Museum and Institute · JPUniversidade de São Paulo · BRCornell University · USNatural History Museum of Geneva · CHSmithsonian Institution · USUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ichthyological surveys have traditionally been conducted using whole-specimen, capture-based sampling with varied but conventional fishing gear. Recently, environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding has emerged as a complementary, and possible alternative, approach to whole-specimen methodologies. In the tropics, where much of the diversity remains undescribed, vast reaches continue unexplored, and anthropogenic activities are constant threats; there have been few eDNA attempts for ichthyological inventories. We tested the discriminatory power of eDNA using MiFish primers with existing public reference libraries and compared this with capture-based methods in two distinct ecosystems in the megadiverse Amazon basin. In our study, eDNA provided an accurate snapshot of the fishes at higher taxonomic levels and corroborated its effectiveness to detect specialized fish assemblages. Some flaws in fish metabarcoding studies are routine issues addressed in natural history museums. Thus, by expanding their archives and adopting a series of initiatives linking collection-based research, training and outreach, natural history museums can enable the effective use of eDNA to survey Earth's hotspots of biodiversity before taxa go extinct. Our project surveying poorly explored rivers and using DNA vouchered archives to build metabarcoding libraries for Neotropical fishes can serve as a model of this protocol.

Indexed as

BiodiversityMuseumsAnimalsData AnalysisDatabases, GeneticDNA Barcoding, TaxonomicDNA, EnvironmentalFishesPhylogenyRiversSouth AmericaSpecies SpecificitySurveys and QuestionnairesDNA, Environmental

Identifiers

PMID34518574
PMCPMC8438044
OpenAlexW3200612726

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.