ArticlePeerJ2022
Disentangling bias for non-destructive insect metabarcoding.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Simultaneous identification of multiple thrips species (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) from sticky traps using DNA metabarcoding.Journal of economic entomology · 2026Article
- Accuracy of occurrence and abundance estimates from insect metabarcoding.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Metabarcoding Reveals the Dietary Patterns of Bats Within a Unique European Habitat, the Pasture-Dominated Landscapes of Ireland.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- A non-destructive, fast, inexpensive, non-toxic chelating resin-based DNA extraction protocol for insect voucher specimens and associated microbiomes.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2025Article
- Soundscapes and deep learning enable tracking biodiversity recovery in tropical forests.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Optimizing insect metabarcoding using replicated mock communities.Methods in ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Article
- FAVIS: Fast and versatile protocol for non-destructive metabarcoding of bulk insect samples.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- The spread of Carpophilus truncatus is on the razor's edge between an outbreak and a pest invasion.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A fast and reliable method for obtaining a species-level identification is a fundamental requirement for a wide range of activities, from plant protection and invasive species management to biodiversity assessments and ecological studies. For insects, novel molecular techniques such as DNA metabarcoding have emerged as a rapid alternative to traditional morphological identification, reducing the dependence on limited taxonomic experts. Until recently, molecular techniques have required a destructive DNA extraction, precluding the possibility of preserving voucher specimens for future studies, or species descriptions. Here we paired insect metabarcoding with two recent non-destructive DNA extraction protocols, to obtain a rapid and high-throughput taxonomic identification of diverse insect taxa while retaining a physical voucher specimen. The aim of this work was to explore how non-destructive extraction protocols impact the semi-quantitative nature of metabarcoding, which alongside species presence/absence also provides a quantitative, but biased, representation of their relative abundances. By using a series of mock communities representing each stage of a typical metabarcoding workflow we were able to determine how different morphological (
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.