ArticlePeerJ2025
Optimizing target-to-total DNA ratio in eDNA studies: effects of sampling, preservation, and extraction methods on single-species detection.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- pH-Dependent Degradation of Macrobial Environmental DNA in Water.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Pooled it
- Protocols and challenges in managing multi-source biological evidence at the crime scene: a scoping review.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- QuickConc Vacuum: A high-sensitive cationic-assisted method for large-volume eDNA concentration and sensitive biodiversity monitoring.MethodsX · 2026Article
- Lessons learned from applying eDNA surveying to diadromous fish detection across the Northeast Atlantic region.Journal of fish biology · 2026Article
- Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Micropropagules in Seawater During the 2020 Green Tide Outbreak in the Southern Yellow Sea.Biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are many decisions to be made when sampling for environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis, whether using a targeted, single-species assay or community-based metabarcoding. Of the entire workflow from sampling water to bioinformatic analyses, the first steps in the process of collecting water, filtering it, and preserving the filter membranes represent major decision points upon which the success of downstream processes depend. Though many previous studies have compared water volume filtered, filter pore size, and preservation and extraction methods, the conclusions are often that they produce different results, but it is unclear which is the optimal approach for a given purpose. Here, rather than provide yet another methods comparison paper, we provide a framework for how to make informed decisions from a methods comparison and, importantly, how to combine data collected
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.