Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38077427›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2023

taxalogue: a toolkit to create comprehensive CO1 reference databases.

Niklas W Noll, Christoph Scherber, Livia Schäffler

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 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

3 authors.

Niklas W NollCentre for Biodiversity Monitoring and Conservation Science, Leibniz Institute for the Analysis of Biodiversity Change, Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.
Christoph ScherberCentre for Biodiversity Monitoring and Conservation Science, Leibniz Institute for the Analysis of Biodiversity Change, Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.
Livia SchäfflerCentre for Biodiversity Monitoring and Conservation Science, Leibniz Institute for the Analysis of Biodiversity Change, Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Taxonomic identification through DNA barcodes gained considerable traction through the invention of next-generation sequencing and DNA metabarcoding. Metabarcoding allows for the simultaneous identification of thousands of organisms from bulk samples with high taxonomic resolution. However, reliable identifications can only be achieved with comprehensive and curated reference databases. Therefore, custom reference databases are often created to meet the needs of specific research questions. Due to taxonomic inconsistencies, formatting issues, and technical difficulties, building a custom reference database requires tremendous effort. Here, we present Methods: Results:

Indexed as

DNADNA Barcoding, TaxonomicDatabases, FactualEcosystemSoftwareDNACO1DNA BarcodingMetabarcodingReference databaseTaxonTaxonomic harmonizationTaxonomic identification

Identifiers

PMID38077427
PMCPMC10702336

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.