ArticleEcology and evolution2025
DNA State Influences the Uptake and Persistence of Environmental DNA by Marine Sponge Natural Samplers.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Evaluation of Mediterranean sponges as natural samplers for environmental DNA (eDNA).Open research Europe · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Marine sponges as natural samplers of environmental DNA (eDNA) are receiving growing attention as an untapped source of biodiversity data. However, little is known about the state of DNA (e.g., cellular or extracellular) that is captured by these samples and how this compares to conventional aquatic eDNA samples. Here, we present an artificial spiking experiment where DNA in cellular and extracellular states was added into tanks containing two sponge species. Aquatic eDNA samples and sponge natural sampler DNA (nsDNA) samples were collected over 7 days and DNA from the two states was quantified in each sample using quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). We found that there was a significant interaction between DNA state and sample type (eDNA and nsDNA), with lower detection and concentration of extracellular DNA, compared to cellular DNA, found in nsDNA samples. We also found that detection rate and concentration of DNA were significantly lower in nsDNA than in eDNA overall. During methodological testing, PCR inhibition was observed in both sponge species; this was prohibitive in one of the species. Further work to investigate the degree of PCR inhibition during nsDNA metabarcoding is important to understand its impact on the communities resolved using nsDNA methods.
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.