ArticlePeerJ2026
Metabarcoding and targeted barcoding can enhance Norwegian Continental Shelf macrofauna species inventories.
Article in PeerJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metabarcoding of bulk community samples is a powerful tool to characterize marine softbottom macrofaunal communities, but high-quality taxonomic assignment is dependent on adequate sequence coverage in taxonomic databases. Here, our main aim was to advance metabarcoding as a complement to benthic morphological taxonomy in biodiversity inventories on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). We used morphological taxonomy, barcoding, and metabarcoding for two objectives, namely to (1) increase macrofauna barcode coverage for a selection of species, and (2) provide an in-depth comparison of morphology and metabarcoding data from mock bulk samples of softbottom macrofauna. We used morphological taxonomy to identify 257 morphotaxa from 32 sieved grab sampling stations at eight areas on the NCS. For the first objective (barcoding), 45 species (95 specimens) were selected from these 32 stations based on incomplete sequence coverage in online repositories, obtaining barcodes for 25 (cytochrome oxidase subunit 1, COI), 35 (18S rDNA), and 24 (28S rDNA) species. Results typically showed an increase in taxonomic assignment of 4-5 ranks in the subsequent metabarcoding data for these particular species. For the second objective (metabarcoding), mock bulk samples with a known taxonomic composition including Annelida, Arthropoda, Mollusca and a single brachiopod, were sequenced using the COI and 18S rDNA V1-V2 partitions from a subset of eight stations from three of the areas. COI Barcode of Life Data System (BOLD) and MIDORI2 assignment with some additional manual sequence curation recovered 100 distinct species-rank taxa compared to 120 species-rank taxa (152 taxa total) from morphology based taxonomic identification. Assignment of 18S rDNA using SILVA recovered 29 unique species including 13 not found in the COI data. Annelida, Arthropoda, and Mollusca were all well-represented in metabarcoding data, and abundance biases were associated with disparate species in a range of clades. Taxonomic congruence was high at high rank, but in some cases species assignments resolved as genus only or sibling species to those identified by morphological taxonomy even when present in one of the databases used. Potential explanations include species genotype variation, putative species complexes and remnant sequencing artifacts. The study findings show the potential of metabarcoding in an area with relatively high taxonomic database coverage. Integrating metabarcoding datasets can increase biodiversity inventory pace and uncover hidden biodiversity, but performance is dependent on database coverage, highlighting the importance of barcoding efforts in biodiversity studies, and metabarcoding-based inventories need to be critically examined by taxonomic expertise.
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.