Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36735064›Full record

ReviewMicrobial ecology2023

An Environmental DNA Primer for Microbial and Restoration Ecology.

Michael Tessler, Seth W Cunningham, Melissa R Ingala, Sally D Warring, Mercer R Brugler

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Microbial ecology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Michael TesslerDepartment of Biology, St. Francis College, Brooklyn, NY, USA. mtessler@sfc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7870-433X
Seth W CunninghamSackler Institute for Comparative Genomics, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY, 10024, USA.
Melissa R IngalaDepartment of Biological Sciences, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Madison, NJ, 07940, USA.
Sally D WarringEarlham Institute, Norwich, NR4 7UZ, UK.
Mercer R BruglerDivision of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY, 10024, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Environmental DNA (eDNA) sequencing-DNA collected from the environment from living cells or shed DNA-was first developed for working with microbes and has greatly benefitted microbial ecologists for decades since. These tools have only become increasingly powerful with the advent of metabarcoding and metagenomics. Most new studies that examine diverse assemblages of bacteria, archaea, protists, fungi, and viruses lean heavily into eDNA using these newer technologies, as the necessary sequencing technology and bioinformatic tools have become increasingly affordable and user friendly. However, eDNA methods are rapidly evolving, and sometimes it can feel overwhelming to simply keep up with the basics. In this review, we provide a starting point for microbial ecologists who are new to DNA-based methods by detailing the eDNA methods that are most pertinent, including study design, sample collection and storage, selecting the right sequencing technology, lab protocols, equipment, and a few bioinformatic tools. Furthermore, we focus on how eDNA work can benefit restoration and what modifications are needed when working in this subfield.

Indexed as

DNA, EnvironmentalBiodiversityDNADNA Barcoding, TaxonomicDNA PrimersEcologyEnvironmental MonitoringDNADNA, EnvironmentalDNA PrimerseDNAeRNAMetabarcodingMetagenomicsMicrobiomeRestoration ecology

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.