ArticleEcology and evolution2025
Comparison of Morphological and DNA-Based Identification Methods to Assess Earthworm (Clitellata: Lumbricidae) Diversity at 25 Permanent Soil Monitoring Sites in Germany.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The most important reason for the lack of a German nationwide and standardised survey of soil organisms is probably the time-consuming and expensive identification of soil invertebrates. The present contribution should contribute to solving this problem. Earthworms and soil were sampled at 25 sites, the animals were identified morphologically and by community DNA (comDNA) and environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding. The comparison of results showed that comDNA detected more species (3.6 on average) than eDNA (3.0) and morphological identification (2.8). In contrast, eDNA, on average, detected a similar number of species as morphological identification. However, some species appear to have a different probability of being detected by eDNA than others, depending on their abundance, behaviour, biology or body size. All three identification methods can differentiate between sites with different species composition, and the degree of separation can vary depending on the identification method. The relative proportion of eDNA reads shows potential as a surrogate of relative abundance/biomass for endogeic but not for anecic species. The overall aim of the 'MetaSOL' project (which the present contribution originated from) was to develop recommendations for efficient and routinely implementable monitoring of soil fauna. The results showed that genetic identification methods are suitable for earthworms. Before genetic identification methods can be introduced into official practice, key preconditions such as comprehensive, well-curated and quality-controlled DNA reference databases and method standardisation must be addressed. Robust indices of soil health based on soil organism data need to be developed. The inclusion of further groups in addition to earthworms should be examined.
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.