ArticleScientific reports2022
Comparative environmental RNA and DNA metabarcoding analysis of river algae and arthropods for ecological surveys and water quality assessment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomonitoring 3.0: Beyond Taxa Lists to Evidence-Tiered Monitoring of Ecosystem Dynamics and Interactions.Ecology and evolution · 2026Review
- Prospects of multipurpose biomonitoring for fisheries assessment based on environmental nucleic acids.Journal of fish biology · 2026Review
- The Evolution of Bees: Insights from 'Omic Studies.Genome biology and evolution · 2026Review
- Article
- Environmental RNA-Based Metatranscriptomics as a Novel Biomonitoring Tool: A Case Study of Glyphosate-Based Herbicide Effects on Freshwater Eukaryotic Communities.Molecular ecology · 2025Article
- How Growth Cones Sense Extracellular Cues and Drive Neuronal Migration: Shared Mechanisms Between Growth Cones of Migrating Neurons and Axons.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2025Review
- DNA Metabarcoding as a Tool to Study Plankton Responses to Warming and Salinity Change in Mesocosms.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Changes in Microbial Community Assemblages Due To Urban Pollution, Detected via rRNA Gene Amplicon Sequencing in the Magdalena River, Mexico City.Microbial ecology · 2025Article
- Harnessing eDNA technology to identify fish diversity and distribution in the Kashi River, a tributary of the Ili River, Xinjiang, China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A molecular specimen bank for contemporary and future study captures landscape-scale biodiversity baselines before Klamath River dam removal.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Sensor Arrays for Electrochemical Detection of PCR-Amplified Genes Extracted from Cells Suspended in Environmental Waters.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluating eDNA and eRNA metabarcoding for aquatic biodiversity assessment: From bacteria to vertebrates.Environmental science and ecotechnology · 2024Article
- Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is widely used for species analysis, while the use of environmental RNA (eRNA) metabarcoding is more limited. We conducted comparative eDNA/eRNA metabarcoding of the algae and arthropods (aquatic insects) in water samples from Naka River, Japan, to evaluate their potential for biological monitoring and water quality assessment. Both methods detected various algae and arthropod species; however, their compositions were remarkably different from those in traditional field surveys (TFSs), indicating low sensitivity. For algae, the species composition derived from eDNA and eRNA metabarcoding was equivalent. While TFSs focus on attached algae, metabarcoding analysis theoretically detects both planktonic and attached algae. A recently expanded genomic database for aquatic insects significantly contributed to the sensitivity and positive predictivity for arthropods. While the sensitivity of eRNA was lower than that of eDNA, the positive predictivity of eRNA was higher. The eRNA of terrestrial arthropods indicated extremely high or low read numbers when compared with eDNA, suggesting that eRNA could be an effective indicator of false positives. Arthropod and algae eDNA/eRNA metabarcoding analysis enabled water quality estimates from TFSs. The eRNA of algae and arthropods could thus be used to evaluate biodiversity and water quality and provide insights from ecological surveys.
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.