ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Three steps towards comparability and standardization among molecular methods for characterizing insect communities.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of occurrence and abundance estimates from insect metabarcoding.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- What evidence exists on wild bee trends in Germany? A systematic map.Environmental evidence · 2025Article
- Emerging technologies and current challenges in intratumoral microbiota research.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Review
- Delivering on a promise: futureproofing automated insect monitoring methods.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Measuring the state of aquatic environments using eDNA-upscaling spatial resolution of biotic indices.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Three steps towards comparability and standardization among molecular methods for characterizing insect communities.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Towards a toolkit for global insect biodiversity monitoring.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Molecular methods are currently some of the best-suited technologies for implementation in insect monitoring. However, the field is developing rapidly and lacks agreement on methodology or community standards. To apply DNA-based methods in large-scale monitoring, and to gain insight across commensurate data, we need easy-to-implement standards that improve data comparability. Here, we provide three recommendations for how to improve and harmonize efforts in biodiversity assessment and monitoring via metabarcoding: (i) we should adopt the use of synthetic spike-ins, which will act as positive controls and internal standards; (ii) we should consider using several markers through a multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) approach; and (iii) we should commit to the publication and transparency of all protocol-associated metadata in a standardized fashion. For (i), we provide a ready-to-use recipe for synthetic cytochrome
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.