ArticleJournal of mammalogy2024
Rapid molecular species identification of mammalian scat samples using nanopore adaptive sampling.
Article in Journal of mammalogy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Selective Extraction of Genomic DNA From Animal Tissues Using a Hydrophobic Magnetic Ionic Liquid.Journal of separation science · 2026Article
- Evaluating the detection capabilities of nanopore sequencing for Borrelia burgdorferi detection in blacklegged ticks.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Going Mobile: Using Portable Genomic Technologies for PCR-Free In Situ Species Identification and Real-Time Molecular Systematics.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Environmental DNA Epigenetics Accurately Predicts the Age of Cultured Fish Larvae.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate taxonomic species identification is essential to the study of mammals. Despite this necessity, rapid and accurate identification of cryptic, understudied, and elusive mammals remains challenging. Traditional barcoding of mitochondrial genes is standard for molecular identification but requires time-consuming wet-lab methodologies. Recent bioinformatic advancements for nanopore sequencing data offer exciting opportunities for noninvasive and field-based identification of mammals. Nanopore adaptive sampling (NAS), a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-free method, selectively sequences regions of DNA according to user-specified reference databases. Here, we utilized NAS to enrich mammalian mitochondrial genome sequencing to identify species. Fecal DNA extractions were sequenced from 9 mammals, several collected in collaboration with Minnesota Tribal Nations, to demonstrate utility for NAS barcoding of noninvasive samples. By mapping to the entire National Center for Biotechnology Information mammalian mitochondrial reference genome database and bioinformatically analyzing highly similar matches, we successfully produced species identifications for all fecal samples. Eight of 9 species identifications matched previous PCR or animal/fecal appearance-based identifications. For the ninth species, our genetic data indicate a misidentification stemming from the original study. Our approach has a range of applications-particularly in field-based wildlife research, conservation, disease surveillance, and monitoring of wildlife trade. Of importance to Minnesota tribes is invasive species monitoring, detections, and confirmation as climate impacts cause changes in biodiversity and shifts in species distributions. The rapid assessment techniques described here will be useful as new introductions and range expansions of native and invasive species may first be detected by the presence of signs such as scat rather than direct observations and will be helpful for chronically understaffed tribal natural resources agencies.
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.