Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38060478›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

From roads to biobanks: Roadkill animals as a valuable source of genetic data.

Manuel Alejandro Coba-Males, Pablo Medrano-Vizcaíno, Sandra Enríquez, David Brito-Zapata, Sarah Martin-Solano, Sofía Ocaña-Mayorga, Gabriel Alberto Carrillo-Bilbao, Wilmer Narváez, Jaime Antonio Salas, Jazzmín Arrivillaga-Henríquez and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Manuel Alejandro Coba-MalesGrupo de Investigación en Biodiversidad, Zoonosis y Salud Pública (GIBCIZ), Instituto de Investigación en Zoonosis (CIZ), Facultad de Ciencias Químicas (FCQ), Universidad Central del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0001-5850-3733
Pablo Medrano-VizcaínoEcology and Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3122-048X
Sandra EnríquezGrupo de Investigación en Biodiversidad, Zoonosis y Salud Pública (GIBCIZ), Instituto de Investigación en Zoonosis (CIZ), Facultad de Ciencias Químicas (FCQ), Universidad Central del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.
David Brito-ZapataRed Ecuatoriana para el Monitoreo de Fauna Atropellada-REMFA, Quito, Ecuador.
Sarah Martin-SolanoGrupo de Investigación en Sanidad Animal y Humana (GISAH), Carrera Ingeniería en Biotecnología, Departamento de Ciencias de la Vida y la Agricultura, Universidad de las Fuerzas Armadas-ESPE, Sangolquí, Ecuador.
Sofía Ocaña-MayorgaCentro de Investigación para la Salud en América Latina, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0003-3861-9784
Gabriel Alberto Carrillo-BilbaoGrupo de Investigación en Biodiversidad, Zoonosis y Salud Pública (GIBCIZ), Instituto de Investigación en Zoonosis (CIZ), Facultad de Ciencias Químicas (FCQ), Universidad Central del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.
Wilmer NarváezGrupo de Investigación en Biodiversidad, Zoonosis y Salud Pública (GIBCIZ), Instituto de Investigación en Zoonosis (CIZ), Facultad de Ciencias Químicas (FCQ), Universidad Central del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.
Jaime Antonio SalasFacultad de Ciencias Naturales, Carrera de Biología, Universidad de Guayaquil, Guayaquil, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0003-3468-5178
Jazzmín Arrivillaga-HenríquezGrupo de Investigación en Biodiversidad, Zoonosis y Salud Pública (GIBCIZ), Instituto de Investigación en Zoonosis (CIZ), Facultad de Ciencias Químicas (FCQ), Universidad Central del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.
Manuela González-SuárezEcology and Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5069-8900
Ana PovedaGrupo de Investigación en Biodiversidad, Zoonosis y Salud Pública (GIBCIZ), Instituto de Investigación en Zoonosis (CIZ), Facultad de Ciencias Químicas (FCQ), Universidad Central del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0003-1505-1372
Central University of Ecuador · ECInstituto Nacional de Biodiversidad · ECPontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador · ECUniversidad de las Fuerzas Armadas ESPE · ECUniversity of Guayaquil · ECUniversity of Reading · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To protect biodiversity we must understand its structure and composition including the bacteria and microparasites associated with wildlife, which may pose risks to human health. However, acquiring this knowledge often presents challenges, particularly in areas of high biodiversity where there are many undescribed and poorly studied species and funding resources can be limited. A solution to fill this knowledge gap is sampling roadkill (animals that die on roads as a result of collisions with circulating vehicles). These specimens can help characterize local wildlife and their associated parasites with fewer ethical and logistical challenges compared to traditional specimen collection. Here we test this approach by analyzing 817 tissue samples obtained from 590 roadkill vertebrate specimens (Amphibia, Reptilia, Aves and Mammalia) collected in roads within the Tropical Andes of Ecuador. First, we tested if the quantity and quality of recovered DNA varied across roadkill specimens collected at different times since death, exploring if decomposition affected the potential to identify vertebrate species and associated microorganisms. Second, we compared DNA stability across taxa and tissues to identify potential limitations and offer recommendations for future work. Finally, we illustrate how these samples can aid in taxonomic identification and parasite detection. Our study shows that sampling roadkill can help study biodiversity. DNA was recovered and amplified (allowing species identification and parasite detection) from roadkill even 120 hours after death, although risk of degradation increased overtime. DNA was extracted from all vertebrate classes but in smaller quantities and with lower quality from amphibians. We recommend sampling liver if possible as it produced the highest amounts of DNA (muscle produced the lowest). Additional testing of this approach in areas with different environmental and traffic conditions is needed, but our results show that sampling roadkill specimens can help detect and potentially monitor biodiversity and could be a valuable approach to create biobanks and preserve genetic data.

Indexed as

Animals, WildBiological Specimen BanksAmphibiansAnimalsDNAHumansMammalsVertebratesDNA

Identifiers

PMID38060478
PMCPMC10703236
OpenAlexW4389430171

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.