Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37143888›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2023

Metabarcoding of soil environmental DNA to estimate plant diversity globally.

Martti Vasar, John Davison, Mari Moora, Siim-Kaarel Sepp, Sten Anslan, Saleh Al-Quraishy, Mohammad Bahram, C Guillermo Bueno, Juan José Cantero, Ezequiel Chimbioputo Fabiano and 18 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 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
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Soil eDNA reflects regionally dominant species rather than local composition of tropical tree communities.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    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

28 authors at 12 institutions in 13 countries.

Martti VasarInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
John DavisonInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Mari MooraInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Siim-Kaarel SeppInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Sten AnslanInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Saleh Al-QuraishyZoology Department, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammad BahramInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
C Guillermo BuenoInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Juan José CanteroInstituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, CONICET, Córdoba, Argentina.
Ezequiel Chimbioputo FabianoDepartment of Wildlife Management and Ecotourism, University of Namibia, Katima Mulilo, Namibia.
Guillaume DecocqEcologie et Dynamique des Systèmes Anthropisés (EDYSAN, UMR CNRS 7058), Jules Verne, University of Picardie, Amiens, France.
Rein DrenkhanInstitute of Forestry and Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.
Lauchlan FraserDepartment of Natural Resource Sciences, Thompson Rivers University, Kamloops, BC, Canada.
Jane OjaInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Roberto Garibay-OrijelInstituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
Inga HiiesaluInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Kadri KooremInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Ladislav MucinaIluka Chair in Vegetation Science and Biogeography, Harry Butler Institute, Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Maarja ÖpikInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Sergei PõlmeCenter of Mycology and Microbiology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Meelis PärtelInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Cherdchai PhosriDepartment of Biology, Nakhon Phanom University, Nakhon Phanom, Thailand.
Marina SemchenkoInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Tanel VahterInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Jiři DoležalInstitute of Botany, The Czech Academy of Sciences, Třeboň, Czechia.
Aida M Vasco PalaciosGrupo de Microbiología Ambiental y Grupo BioMicro, Escuela de Microbiología, Universidad de Antioquia UdeA, Medellín, Colombia.
Leho TedersooZoology Department, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Martin ZobelZoology Department, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
University of Tartu · EEKing Saud University · SACentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRCzech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Botany · CZEstonian University of Life Sciences · EEInstituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal · ARMurdoch University · AUNakhon Phanom University · THThompson Rivers University · CAUniversidad de Antioquia · COUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México · MXUniversity of Namibia · NA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Traditional approaches to collecting large-scale biodiversity data pose huge logistical and technical challenges. We aimed to assess how a comparatively simple method based on sequencing environmental DNA (eDNA) characterises global variation in plant diversity and community composition compared with data derived from traditional plant inventory methods. Methods: We sequenced a short fragment (P6 loop) of the chloroplast trnL intron from from 325 globally distributed soil samples and compared estimates of diversity and composition with those derived from traditional sources based on empirical (GBIF) or extrapolated plant distribution and diversity data. Results: Large-scale plant diversity and community composition patterns revealed by sequencing eDNA were broadly in accordance with those derived from traditional sources. The success of the eDNA taxonomy assignment, and the overlap of taxon lists between eDNA and GBIF, was greatest at moderate to high latitudes of the northern hemisphere. On average, around half (mean: 51.5% SD 17.6) of local GBIF records were represented in eDNA databases at the species level, depending on the geographic region. Discussion: eDNA trnL gene sequencing data accurately represent global patterns in plant diversity and composition and thus can provide a basis for large-scale vegetation studies. Important experimental considerations for plant eDNA studies include using a sampling volume and design to maximise the number of taxa detected and optimising the sequencing depth. However, increasing the coverage of reference sequence databases would yield the most significant improvements in the accuracy of taxonomic assignments made using the P6 loop of the trnL region.

Indexed as

distributiondiversityenvironmental DNAmolecular methodsplantsoilTRNL

Identifiers

PMID37143888
PMCPMC10151745
OpenAlexW4366290761

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.