ArticleMolecular ecology resources2026
Scoop That Poop: Optimising Faecal Sample Pre-Processing for Parasite Metabarcoding.
Article in Molecular ecology resources, 2026. 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.
- Scoop That Poop: Optimising Faecal Sample Pre-Processing for Parasite Metabarcoding.Molecular ecology resources · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Molecular techniques such as DNA metabarcoding are increasingly used to characterise parasite communities. However, relatively few studies have examined how sample processing methods influence detection rates. We used faecal samples collected from free-roaming horses to evaluate how parasite density and pre-processing methods influenced quantification of parasite richness, community composition, and detection of different taxa. Methods that concentrated parasites substantially increased parasite detection, especially at the low infection levels often seen in wildlife. Specifically, we found that DNA extracts from larval coproculture and a newly developed egg concentration approach detected approximately twice as many species and genera as extracts made directly from faecal matter. Although parasite richness was consistently lower in these faecal subsamples, overall parasite communities were still similar between pre-processing methods. Ultimately, the optimal method depends on research constraints and goals. Working with parasite larvae is more time intensive, but lower cost as larval parasites can be extracted using a lysis buffer approach which performs similarly to commercial extraction kits. DNA extraction from faecal subsamples misses rare and common taxa but minimises field processing. Our novel egg concentration method offers a compromise between relatively rapid processing and high sensitivity.
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.