Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41703618›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2026

Swab vs rollers: a comparison of methods to collect eDNA from vegetative surfaces.

Marina Elisa de Oliveira, Paul Nevill, Mieke van der Heyde

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Marina Elisa de OliveiraMBioMe - Mine Site Biomonitoring Using eDNA Research Group, Trace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, School of Molecular and Life Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia. marina.deoliveira@curtin.edu.au.
Paul NevillMBioMe - Mine Site Biomonitoring Using eDNA Research Group, Trace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, School of Molecular and Life Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia.
Mieke van der HeydeMBioMe - Mine Site Biomonitoring Using eDNA Research Group, Trace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, School of Molecular and Life Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6102, Australia.

Funding

BHP HRSA HHS eDNA for Global Environment Studies
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEnvironmental DNA can be collected from vegetative surfaces circumventing the need for extensive equipment and multiple visits as often required by other sampling methods. This approach potentially offers a cost-effective and time-efficient means of capturing genetic material that can be used to provide valuable insights into terrestrial biodiversity. However, the effect of the material used to collect the sample is unknown. Here we compare the suitability of both clinical swabs and mini paint rollers to collect eDNA from vegetative surfaces in a bushland reserve in Western Australia.

resultsBoth methods detected diverse eukaryote communities. There were no significant differences in ZOTU richness or community composition between the approaches, although the paint rollers had slightly higher cumulative richness. The choice between the two methods will likely be determined by logistical constraints: paint rollers are more expensive, bigger, and may be more susceptible to contamination but sample a greater surface area and can be readily attached to poles to access difficult to reach areas. Clinical swabs come sterile, are relatively small, and cheaper, but have limited reach and would require modification of poles. Although the sample size was small, results presented here can help guide future surface-based eDNA studies.

Indexed as

DNA, EnvironmentalEukaryotaSpecimen HandlingBiodiversityExtrachromosomal DNAWestern AustraliaDNA, EnvironmentalExtrachromosomal DNACost comparisonMetabarcodingMolecular ecologyNon-invasive samplingRemote samplingTerrestrial monitoring

Identifiers

PMID41703618
PMCPMC13015053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.