Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36643652›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2023

Be positive: customized reference databases and new, local barcodes balance false taxonomic assignments in metabarcoding studies.

Francesco Mugnai, Federica Costantini, Anne Chenuil, Michèle Leduc, José Miguel Gutiérrez Ortega, Emese Meglécz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. ZooKeys · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

Francesco MugnaiDepartment of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences (BiGeA), University of Bologna, Ravenna, Italy.
Federica CostantiniDepartment of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences (BiGeA), University of Bologna, Ravenna, Italy.
Anne ChenuilAix Marseille Univ, Avignon Université, CNRS, IRD, IMBE, Marseille, France.
Michèle LeducSTARESO marine station, Calvi, Corse, France.
José Miguel Gutiérrez OrtegaTAXON Estudios Ambientales S.L., Alcantarilla (Murcia), Spain.
Emese MegléczAix Marseille Univ, Avignon Université, CNRS, IRD, IMBE, Marseille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In metabarcoding analyses, the taxonomic assignment is crucial to place sequencing data in biological and ecological contexts. This fundamental step depends on a reference database, which should have a good taxonomic coverage to avoid unassigned sequences. However, this goal is rarely achieved in many geographic regions and for several taxonomic groups. On the other hand, more is not necessarily better, as sequences in reference databases belonging to taxonomic groups out of the studied region/environment context might lead to false assignments. Methods: We investigated the effect of using several subsets of a cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) reference database on taxonomic assignment. Published metabarcoding sequences from the Mediterranean Sea were assigned to taxa using COInr, which is a comprehensive, non-redundant and recent database of COI sequences obtained both from BOLD and NCBI, and two of its subsets: (i) all sequences except insects (COInr-WO-Insecta), which represent the overwhelming majority of COInr database, but are irrelevant for marine samples, and (ii) all sequences from taxonomic families present in the Mediterranean Sea (COInr-Med). Four different algorithms for taxonomic assignment were employed in parallel to evaluate differences in their output and data consistency. Results: The reduction of the database to more specific custom subsets increased the number of unassigned sequences. Nevertheless, since most of them were incorrectly assigned by the less specific databases, this is a positive outcome. Moreover, the taxonomic resolution (the lowest taxonomic level to which a sequence is attributed) of several sequences tended to increase when using customized databases. These findings clearly indicated the need for customized databases adapted to each study. However, the very high proportion of unassigned sequences points to the need to enrich the local database with new barcodes specifically obtained from the studied region and/or taxonomic group. Including novel local barcodes to the COI database proved to be very profitable: by adding only 116 new barcodes sequenced in our laboratory, thus increasing the reference database by only 0.04%, we were able to improve the resolution for ca. 0.6-1% of the Amplicon Sequence Variants (ASVs).

Indexed as

Aquatic OrganismsDNA Barcoding, TaxonomicDatabases, FactualMediterranean SeaCOICOInrConservation biologyMarine taxaMetabarcodingmkCOInrReference databasesTaxonomic assignment

Identifiers

PMID36643652
PMCPMC9835706

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.