ReviewAoB PLANTS2022
Environmental DNA analysis as an emerging non-destructive method for plant biodiversity monitoring: a review.
Review in AoB PLANTS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- QuickConc Vacuum: A high-sensitive cationic-assisted method for large-volume eDNA concentration and sensitive biodiversity monitoring.MethodsX · 2026Article
- Performance Profiles of Short DNA Barcode Segments for Family Level Detection of Asteraceae Within Asterales.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- From fish to invertebrates: multi-marker eDNA metabarcoding for monitoring wetland biodiversity and non-indigenous species in Macao SAR China.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Assessment of leaf-litter invertebrate biodiversity using high throughput sequencing.PloS one · 2026Article
- Moss-Accumulated eDNA Is a Promising Source for Terrestrial Biodiversity Surveys Across the Tree of Life and Biomes.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- Methods, applications, and computational challenges in bait capture enrichment.Cell reports methods · 2025Review
- Comparative Analysis of Pasture Composition: DNA Metabarcoding Versus Quadrat-Based Botanical Surveys in Experimental Grassland Plots.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Pond Water eDNA Reflects Broad Consistency with Surrounding Terrestrial Plant Ecosystems.Biology · 2025Article
- Ecotones as Windows into Organismal-to-Biome Scale Responses across Neotropical Forests.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The importance of species addition 'versus' replacement varies over succession in plant communities after glacier retreat.Nature plants · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis has recently transformed and modernized biodiversity monitoring. The accurate detection, and to some extent quantification, of organisms (individuals/populations/communities) in environmental samples is galvanizing eDNA as a successful cost and time-efficient biomonitoring technique. Currently, eDNA's application to plants remains more limited in implementation and scope compared to animals and microorganisms. This review evaluates the development of eDNA-based methods for (vascular) plants, comparing its performance and power of detection with that of traditional methods, to critically evaluate and advise best-practices needed to innovate plant biomonitoring. Recent advancements, standardization and field applications of eDNA-based methods have provided enough scope to utilize it in conservation biology for numerous organisms. Despite our review demonstrating only 13% of all eDNA studies focus on plant taxa to date, eDNA has considerable environmental DNA has considerable potential for plants, where successful detection of invasive, endangered and rare species, and community-level interpretations have provided proof-of-concept. Monitoring methods using eDNA were found to be equal or more effective than traditional methods; however, species detection increased when both methods were coupled. Additionally, eDNA methods were found to be effective in studying species interactions, community dynamics and even effects of anthropogenic pressure. Currently, elimination of potential obstacles (e.g. lack of relevant DNA reference libraries for plants) and the development of user-friendly protocols would greatly contribute to comprehensive eDNA-based plant monitoring programs. This is particularly needed in the data-depauperate tropics and for some plant groups (e.g., Bryophytes and Pteridophytes). We further advocate to coupling traditional methods with eDNA approaches, as the former is often cheaper and methodologically more straightforward, while the latter offers non-destructive approaches with increased discrimination ability. Furthermore, to make a global platform for eDNA, governmental and academic-industrial collaborations are essential to make eDNA surveys a broadly adopted and implemented, rapid, cost-effective and non-invasive plant monitoring approach.
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.