ArticleEcology and evolution2023
Evaluating the sampling effort for the metabarcoding-based detection of fish environmental DNA in the open ocean.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Rainfall on Aquatic and Terrestrial Species Monitoring Using Riverine Environmental DNA.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Optimizing a Novel eDNA-Based Framework for Reef Fish Biodiversity Monitoring Using an Autonomous Filtration System and in situ Nanopore Sequencing.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating the sampling effort for the metabarcoding-based detection of fish environmental DNA in the open ocean.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clarifying the effect of the sampling protocol on the detection of environmental DNA (eDNA) is essential for appropriately designing biodiversity research. However, technical issues influencing eDNA detection in the open ocean, which consists of water masses with varying environmental conditions, have not been thoroughly investigated. This study evaluated the sampling effort for the metabarcoding-based detection of fish eDNA using replicate sampling with filters of different pore sizes (0.22 and 0.45 μm) in the subtropical and subarctic northwestern Pacific Ocean and Arctic Chukchi Sea. The asymptotic analysis predicted that the accumulation curves for detected taxa did not saturate in most cases, indicating that our sampling effort (7 or 8 replicates, corresponding to 10.5-40 L of filtration in total) was insufficient to fully assess the species diversity in the open ocean and that tens of replicates or a substantial filtration volume were required. The Jaccard dissimilarities between filtration replicates were comparable with those between the filter types at any site. In subtropical and subarctic sites, turnover dominated the dissimilarity, suggesting that the filter pore size had a negligible effect. In contrast, nestedness dominated the dissimilarity in the Chukchi Sea, implying that the 0.22 μm filter could collect a broader range of eDNA than the 0.45 μm filter. Therefore, the effect of filter selection on the collection of fish eDNA likely varies depending on the region. These findings highlight the highly stochastic nature of fish eDNA collection in the open ocean and the difficulty of standardizing the sampling protocol across various water masses.
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.