ArticleBMC research notes2025
Comparison of whole genome sequencing performance from fish swabs and fin clips.
Article in BMC research notes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Swabbing as a Non-Lethal DNA Collection Method for Earthworm Barcoding: Performance and Citizen Science Perspectives.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFin clipping is the standard DNA sampling technique for whole genome sequencing (WGS) of small fish. The collection of fin clips requires anaesthesia or even euthanisation of the individual. Swabbing may be a less invasive, non-lethal alternative to fin-clipping. Whether skin and gill swabs are comparable to fin clips in terms of DNA extraction quality and sequence read mapping performance from WGS was tested here on Eurasian minnows (Phoxinus phoxinus).
resultsOf 49 fin clips, all met the DNA concentration threshold of 20 ng/μl, whereas 43 of 88 swabs met this requirement. Preserving swabs in ATL buffer and treatment with Proteinase K during DNA extraction consistently raised skin swab DNA concentrations above the cut-off. All samples passed the A260/A280 absorbance ratio cut-off of 1.3. Ultimately, 93.88% of the fin clips, 30.61% of the skin, and 7.69% of the gill swabs were suitable for sequencing. Mapping performances of all three tissues were comparable in reads passing quality filtering, percentage of reads mapping to the P. phoxinus reference genome, and coverage. Overall, skin swabs treated with Proteinase K during extraction, can match fin clips in WGS performance and represent a viable non-invasive DNA sampling alternative.
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.