ArticleMicrobial ecology2024
Comparison of Metabarcoding and Microscopy Methodologies to Analyze Diatom Communities in Five Estuaries Along the Southern Coast of the Korean Peninsula.
Article in Microbial ecology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review: Long-Read Sequencing in Algal Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Pooled it
- A Comparative Analysis of DNA Metabarcoding and Morphological Identification in Diatoms Reveals Similar Patterns of Environmental Response.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study of microalgal communities is critical for understanding aquatic ecosystems. These communities primarily comprise diatoms (Heterokontophyta), with two methods commonly used to study them: Microscopy and metabarcoding. However, these two methods often deliver different results; thus, their suitability for analyzing diatom communities is frequently debated and evaluated. This study used these two methods to analyze the diatom communities in identical water samples and compare the results. The taxonomy of the species constituting the diatom communities was confirmed, and both methods showed that species belonging to the orders Bacillariales and Naviculales (class Bacillariophyceae) are the most diverse. In the lower taxonomic levels (family, genus, and species), microscopy tended to show a bias toward detecting diatom species (Nitzschia frustulum, Nitzschia inconspicua, Nitzschia intermedia, Navicula gregaria, Navicula perminuta, Navicula recens, Navicula sp.) belonging to the Bacillariaceae and Naviculaceae families. The results of the two methods differed in identifying diatom species in the communities and analyzing their structural characteristics. These results are consistent with the fact that diatoms belonging to the genera Nitzschia and Navicula are abundant in the communities; furthermore, only the Illumina MiSeq data showed the abundance of the Melosira and Entomoneis genera. The results obtained from microscopy were superior to those of Illumina MiSeq regarding species-level identification. Based on the results obtained via microscopy and Illumina MiSeq, it was revealed that neither method is perfect and that each has clear strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, to analyze diatom communities effectively and accurately, these two methods should be combined.
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.