Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40243260›Full record

ArticleMolecular ecology resources2025

A Comprehensive Evaluation of Taxonomic Classifiers in Marine Vertebrate eDNA Studies.

Philipp E Bayer, Adam Bennett, Georgia Nester, Shannon Corrigan, Eric J Raes, Madalyn Cooper, Marcelle E Ayad, Philip McVey, Anya Kardailsky, Jessica Pearce and 4 more

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular ecology resources, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

14 authors.

Philipp E BayerMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8530-3067
Adam BennettMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Georgia NesterMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9721-4512
Shannon CorriganMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0093-5028
Eric J RaesMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4131-9312
Madalyn CooperMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3078-5534
Marcelle E AyadMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9314-5844
Philip McVeyMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Anya KardailskyMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-7844-7072
Jessica PearceMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2353-1149
Matthew W FraserMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2309-8074
Priscila GoncalvesMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7299-3169
Stephen BurnellMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Sebastian RauschertMinderoo Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8359-6898

Funding

Minderoo Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is a widely used tool for surveying marine vertebrate biodiversity. To this end, many computational tools have been released and a plethora of bioinformatic approaches are used for eDNA-based community composition analysis. Simulation studies and careful evaluation of taxonomic classifiers are essential to establish reliable benchmarks to improve the accuracy and reproducibility of eDNA-based findings. Here we present a comprehensive evaluation of nine taxonomic classifiers exploring three widely used mitochondrial markers (12S rDNA, 16S rDNA and COI) in Australian marine vertebrates. Curated reference databases and exclusion database tests were used to simulate diverse species compositions, including three positive control and two negative control datasets. Using these simulated datasets ranging from 36 to 302 marker genes, we were able to identify between 19% and 89% of marine vertebrate species using mitochondrial markers. We show that MMSeqs2 and Metabuli generally outperform BLAST with 10% and 11% higher F1 scores for 12S and 16S rDNA markers, respectively, and that Naive Bayes Classifiers such as Mothur outperform sequence-based classifiers except MMSeqs2 for COI markers by 11%. Database exclusion tests reveal that MMSeqs2 and BLAST are less susceptible to false positives compared to Kraken2 with default parameters. Based on these findings, we recommend that MMSeqs2 is used for taxonomic classification of marine vertebrates given its ability to improve species-level assignments while reducing the number of false positives. Our work contributes to the establishment of best practices in eDNA-based biodiversity analysis to ultimately increase the reliability of this monitoring tool in the context of marine vertebrate conservation.

Indexed as

Aquatic OrganismsDNA Barcoding, TaxonomicDNA, EnvironmentalMetagenomicsVertebratesAnimalsAustraliaBiodiversityComputational BiologyRNA, RibosomalRNA, Ribosomal, 16SDNA, EnvironmentalRNA, RibosomalRNA, ribosomal, 12SRNA, Ribosomal, 16Senvironmental DNAmachine learningmarine biodiversitysequence alignmenttaxonomic classifiers

Identifiers

PMID40243260
PMCPMC12415807

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.