Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40361631›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Development of a DNA Metabarcoding Method for the Identification of Crustaceans (

Julia Andronache, Margit Cichna-Markl, Stefanie Dobrovolny, Rupert Hochegger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Julia AndronacheDepartment of Molecular Biology and Microbiology, Institute for Food Safety, Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety (AGES), Spargelfeldstraße 191, 1220 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0009-0003-5013-8462
Margit Cichna-MarklDepartment of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry, University of Vienna, Währinger Straße 38, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-8699-674X
Stefanie DobrovolnyDepartment of Molecular Biology and Microbiology, Institute for Food Safety, Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety (AGES), Spargelfeldstraße 191, 1220 Vienna, Austria.
Rupert HocheggerDepartment of Molecular Biology and Microbiology, Institute for Food Safety, Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety (AGES), Spargelfeldstraße 191, 1220 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-9792-7616

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Seafood is a valuable commodity with increasing demand, traded for billions of USD each year. The volatility in supply chains and fluctuating prices contribute to the susceptibility of the seafood market to food fraud. Analytical methods are required to identify seafood in processed foods to ensure food authenticity and compliance with European laws. To address this need, we developed and validated a DNA metabarcoding method for the authentication of crustaceans and cephalopods in processed food samples, as both are prone to food fraud, especially in mixed products. A ~200 bp barcode of the mitochondrial 16S rDNA was selected as the marker for identification and sequenced on Illumina platforms. The DNA metabarcoding method utilizes two primer systems, one for the amplification of crustacean DNA and another for cephalopods. The crustacean primer system comprises two forward and two reverse primers, while the cephalopod primer system includes three forward and one reverse primer. DNA extracts from reference materials, model foods, processed foodstuffs, and DNA extract mixtures were investigated. Even species with a close phylogenetic relationship were successfully identified and differentiated in commercial samples, while single species were detected at amounts as low as 0.003% in model foods. However, false-negative results were obtained for certain species in DNA extract mixtures, which are most likely due to degraded or low-quality DNA and can best be prevented by optimized DNA extraction procedures. Our DNA metabarcoding method demonstrates strong potential as a qualitative screening tool in combination with other in-house DNA metabarcoding methods for food authentication in routine analysis.

Indexed as

cephalopods (Coleoidea)crustaceans (Malacostraca)DNA metabarcodingfood authenticationmitochondrial 16S rDNAnext-generation sequencingseafoodspecies identification

Identifiers

PMID40361631
PMCPMC12071261

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.