ArticlePloS one2024
In silico assessment of 18S rDNA metabarcoding markers for the characterization of nematode communities.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Network Topology and Undominated Assembly Processes Govern Soil Nematode Community Responses to Forest Type.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- DNA source and primer choice affect the reliability of metabarcoding for nematode community profiling in agricultural soils.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comparative metabarcoding study performed on the mock soil nematode communities, composed of DESS-preserved and freshly extracted nematodes.Journal of nematology · 2026Article
- Barcoding of Italian mosquitoes (BITMO): generation and validation of DNA barcoding reference libraries for native and alien species of Culicidae.Parasites & vectors · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nematodes are keystone actors of soil, freshwater and marine ecosystems, but the complexity of morphological identification has limited broad-scale monitoring of nematode biodiversity. DNA metabarcoding is increasingly used to assess nematode diversity but requires universal primers with high taxonomic coverage and high taxonomic resolution. Several primers have been proposed for the metabarcoding of nematode diversity, many of which target the 18S rRNA gene. In silico analyses have a great potential to assess key parameters of primers, including taxonomic coverage, resolution and specificity. Based on a recently-available reference database, we tested in silico the performance of fourteen commonly used and one newly optimized primer for nematode metabarcoding. Most primers showed very good coverage, amplifying most of the sequences in the reference database, while four markers showed limited coverage. All primers showed good taxonomic resolution. Resolution was particularly good if the aim was the identification of higher-level taxa, such as genera or families. Overall, species-level resolution was higher for primers amplifying long fragments. None of the primers was highly specific for nematodes as, despite some variation, they all amplified a large number of other eukaryotes. Differences in performance across primers highlight the complexity of the choice of markers appropriate for the metabarcoding of nematodes, which depends on a trade-off between taxonomic resolution and the length of amplified fragments. Our in silico analyses provide new insights for the identification of the most appropriate primers, depending on the study goals and the origin of DNA samples. This represents an essential step to design and optimize metabarcoding studies assessing nematode diversity.
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.