Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39027464›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and ecotechnology2024

Evaluating eDNA and eRNA metabarcoding for aquatic biodiversity assessment: From bacteria to vertebrates.

Yan Zhang, Yu Qiu, Kai Liu, Wenjun Zhong, Jianghua Yang, Florian Altermatt, Xiaowei Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science and ecotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Yan ZhangState Key Laboratory of Pollution Control & Resource Reuse, School of the Environment, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210023, China.
Yu QiuState Key Laboratory of Pollution Control & Resource Reuse, School of the Environment, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210023, China.
Kai LiuKey Laboratory of Freshwater Fisheries and Germplasm Resources Utilization, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Freshwater Fisheries Research Center, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences, Wuxi, 214081, China.
Wenjun ZhongState Key Laboratory of Pollution Control & Resource Reuse, School of the Environment, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210023, China.
Jianghua YangState Key Laboratory of Pollution Control & Resource Reuse, School of the Environment, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210023, China.
Florian AltermattDepartment of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Xiaowei ZhangState Key Laboratory of Pollution Control & Resource Reuse, School of the Environment, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210023, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The monitoring and management of aquatic ecosystems depend on precise estimates of biodiversity. Metabarcoding analyses of environmental nucleic acids (eNAs), including environmental DNA (eDNA) and environmental RNA (eRNA), have garnered attention for their cost-effective and non-invasive biomonitoring capabilities. However, the accuracy of biodiversity estimates obtained through eNAs can vary among different organismal groups. Here we evaluate the performance of eDNA and eRNA metabarcoding across nine organismal groups, ranging from bacteria to terrestrial vertebrates, in three cross-sections of the Yangtze River, China. We observe robust complementarity between eDNA and eRNA data. The relative detectability of eNAs was notably influenced by major taxonomic groups and organismal sizes, with eDNA providing more robust signals for larger organisms. Both eDNA and eRNA exhibited similar cross-sectional and longitudinal patterns. However, the detectability of larger organisms declined in eRNA metabarcoding, possibly due to differential RNA release and decay among different organismal groups or sizes. While underscoring the potential of eDNA and eRNA in large river biomonitoring, we emphasize the need for differential interpretation of eDNA versus eRNA data. This highlights the importance of careful method selection and interpretation in biomonitoring studies.

Indexed as

Aquatic biodiversityEnvironmental nucleic acidsOrganismal sizeSpecies detectability

Identifiers

PMID39027464
PMCPMC11254946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.