ArticlePloS one2025
Evaluation of nanopore sequencing for increasing accessibility of eDNA studies in biodiverse countries.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-time genomic pathogen, resistance, and host range characterization from passive water sampling of wetland ecosystems.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2026Article
- Integrative Bioinformatics Approaches in Environmental Biotechnology: A Review.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2026Review
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
Biodiversity loss is a global challenge of the 21st century. Environmental DNA (eDNA)-based metabarcoding offers a cost- and time-efficient alternative to conventional biodiversity surveys, enabling detection of rare, cryptic, and elusive species from environmental samples. However, limited access to genomic technologies restricts the application of eDNA metabarcoding in highly biodiverse remote regions and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Here, we directly compared the latest portable nanopore sequencing methods with established Illumina sequencing for vertebrate eDNA metabarcoding of Zambian water samples. Our results show that due to recent improvements in sequencing chemistry and optimized basecalling, nanopore sequencing data can recapitulate or even surpass established protocols, demonstrating the feasibility of in situ biodiversity assessments. eDNA- and camera trap-based species detections had minimal overlap in species detections, suggesting a complementary rather than substituting application of these biodiversity monitoring technologies. We finally demonstrate that our entire eDNA workflow can be successfully implemented in a mobile laboratory under remote field conditions by completing all steps-from sample collection to data analysis-within the Luambe National Park in Zambia. This approach has important implications for capacity building in LMICs and for overcoming limitations associated with sample export.
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.