ArticleEcology and evolution2024
Application of environmental DNA metabarcoding to identify fish community characteristics in subtropical river systems.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 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.
- Comparison between eDNA and traditional morphological methods for fish diversity monitoring in rivers.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Distribution, Diversity, and Indicator Species of Coral Communities Under the Influence of Environmental Changes in the Subtropical Peninsula of Southern China.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Spatial Variation in Food Web Structures, Energy Flows, and System Attributes Along the Pearl River and Their Indications of Protection and Restoration.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Application of environmental DNA metabarcoding to identify fish community characteristics in subtropical river systems.Ecology and evolution · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fish are vital in river ecosystems; however, traditional investigations of fish usually cause ecological damage. Extracting DNA from aquatic environments and identifying DNA sequences offer an alternative, noninvasive approach for detecting fish species. In this study, the effects of environmental DNA (eDNA), coupled with PCR and next-generation sequencing, and electrofishing for identifying fish community composition and diversity were compared. In three subtropical rivers of southern China, fish specimens and eDNA in water were collected along the longitudinal (upstream-downstream) gradient of the rivers. Both fish population parameters, including species abundance and biomass, and eDNA OTU richness grouped 38 sampling sites into eight spatial zones with significant differences in local fish community composition. Compared with order-/family-level grouping, genus-/species-level grouping could more accurately reveal the differences between upstream zones I-III, midstream zones IV-V, and downstream zones VI-VIII. From the headwaters to the estuary, two environmental gradients significantly influenced the longitudinal distribution of the fish species, including the first gradient composed of habitat and physical water parameters and the second gradient composed of chemical water parameters. The high regression coefficient of alpha diversity between eDNA and electrofishing methods as well as the accurate identification of dominant, alien, and biomarker species in each spatial zone indicated that eDNA could characterize fish community attributes at a level similar to that of traditional approaches. Overall, our results demonstrated that eDNA metabarcoding can be used as an effective tool for revealing fish composition and diversity, which is important for using the eDNA technique in aquatic field monitoring.
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.