Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41733551›Full record

ArticleMolecular ecology resources2026

Sampling Design and Sample Processing Affect Soil Biodiversity Assessments.

Meirong Chen, Olesya Dulya, Vladimir Mikryukov, Ovidiu Copot, Martin Metsoja, Leho Tedersoo

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Meirong ChenInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7119-6263
Olesya DulyaInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Vladimir MikryukovInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2786-2690
Ovidiu CopotInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Martin MetsojaInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Leho TedersooInstitute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1635-1249

Funding

China Scholarship CouncilEstonian Research Council PRG632
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biodiversity surveys require an appropriate sampling design for optimal performance and comparability across space and time and across studies. Based on PacBio and Illumina amplicon sequencing of animals, bacteria and fungi, we assessed and compared various soil sampling designs from widely used continental and global metabarcoding-based biodiversity projects. Sampling designs revealed up to 27-fold, 6-fold and 15-fold differences in biodiversity estimates for animals, bacteria and fungi, respectively. Taxonomic coverage depended mostly on the number of subsamples but not sampling area within the 347-1790 m

Indexed as

BacteriaBiodiversityFungiSoil MicrobiologySpecimen HandlingAnimalsSoilSoilenvironmental DNAhigh‐throughput sequencingmolecular artefactPacBiosample poolingsoil microorganisms

Identifiers

PMID41733551
PMCPMC12931581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.