Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39854348›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Insights into the representativeness of biodiversity assessment in large reservoir through eDNA metabarcoding.

Thainá Cortez, André Torres, Murilo Guimarães, Henrique Pinheiro, Marcelo Cabral, Gabriel Zielinsky, Camila Pereira, Giovanni de Castro, Luana Guerreiro, Juliana Americo and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

12 authors.

Thainá CortezBio Bureau Biotechnology, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2312-5087
André TorresLaboratório de Biologia, Controle e Vigilância de Insetos Vetores, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, FIOCRUZ, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5041-4146
Murilo GuimarãesBiology Institute, Federal University of Piauí, Teresina, Piauí, Brazil.
Henrique PinheiroBio Bureau Biotechnology, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Marcelo CabralProoceano, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Gabriel ZielinskyProoceano, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Camila PereiraCarlos Chagas Filho Institute of Biophysics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Giovanni de CastroCarlos Chagas Filho Institute of Biophysics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Luana GuerreiroCarlos Chagas Filho Institute of Biophysics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Juliana AmericoBio Bureau Biotechnology, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Danielle do AmaralBio Bureau Biotechnology, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Mauro RebeloBio Bureau Biotechnology, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monitoring biodiversity on a large scale, such as in hydropower reservoirs, poses scientific challenges. Conventional methods such as passive fishing gear are prone to various biases, while the utilization of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding has been restricted. Most eDNA studies have primarily focused on replicating results from traditional methods, which themselves have limitations regarding representativeness and bias. In our study, we employed eDNA metabarcoding with three markers (12SrRNA, COI, and 16SrRNA) to evaluate the biodiversity of an 800 km2 reservoir. We utilized hydrodynamic modeling to determine water flow velocity and the water renewal ratio throughout the study area. Additionally, we conducted statistical comparisons-rarefaction curves and multivariate methods-among samples as an alternative approach to assess biodiversity representation. The eDNA identified taxa previously documented in the reservoir by traditional monitoring methods, as well as revealed 29 -nine fishes and 20 non-fish-previously unreported species. These results highlight the robustness of eDNA as a biodiversity monitoring technique. Our findings also indicated that by randomly sampling 30% of the original number of samples, we could effectively capture the same biodiversity. This approach enabled us to comprehend the reservoir's biodiversity profile and propose a straightforward, cost-effective monitoring protocol for the future based on eDNA.

Indexed as

BiodiversityDNA Barcoding, TaxonomicDNA, EnvironmentalEnvironmental MonitoringAnimalsFishesDNA, Environmental

Identifiers

PMID39854348
PMCPMC11761093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.