ArticleBiodiversity data journal2025
Building a reliable 16S mini-barcode library of wild bees from Occitania, south-west of France.
Article in Biodiversity data journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 16S rRNA sequence dataset for the identification of the French hoverflies (Diptera, Syrphidae).Biodiversity data journal · 2026Article
- CODABEILLES: a reliable reference library of COI DNA barcodes for French wild bees monitoring (Apoidea: Anthophila).BMC ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Wild bees (Apoidea, Anthophila) of south-west France: more than 10 years of inventories in mosaic landscapes of "Vallées et Coteaux de Gascogne" (ZA-PYGAR).Biodiversity data journal · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: DNA barcoding and metabarcoding are now powerful tools for studying biodiversity and especially the accurate identification of large sample collections belonging to diverse taxonomic groups. Their success depends largely on the taxonomic resolution of the DNA sequences used as barcodes and on the reliability of the reference databases. For wild bees, the barcode sequences coverage is consistently growing in volume, but some incorrect species annotations need to be cared for. The COI (Cytochrome Oxydase subunit 1) gene, the most used in barcoding/metabarcoding of arthropods, suffers from primer bias and difficulties for covering all wild bee species using the classical Folmer primers. New information: We present here a curated database for a 250 bp mini-barcode region of the 16S rRNA gene, suitable for low-cost metabarcoding wild bees in applications, such as eDNA analysis or for sequencing ancient or degraded DNA. Sequenced specimens were captured in Occitania (south-west of France) and morphologically identified by entomologists, with a total of 530 individuals belonging to 171 species and 19 genera. A customised workflow including distance-tree inferences and a second round of entomologist observations, when necessary, was used for the validation of 348 mini-barcodes covering 148 species. Amongst them, 93 species did not have any 16S reference barcode available before our contribution. This high-quality reference library data are freely available to the scientific community, with the aim of facilitating future large-scale characterisation of wild bee communities in a context of pollinators' decline.
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.