ArticleMolecular ecology resources2026
Navigating Cetacean Mitochondrial Genome Data: Identifying Coverage and Deficiencies in Public Repositories.
Article in Molecular ecology resources, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genetic reference databases underpin a wide range of molecular approaches used to study cetacean biodiversity, including environmental DNA (eDNA), yet their reliability depends critically on data completeness, taxonomic accuracy, and metadata quality. Here, we present the first global assessment of mitochondrial sequence availability for cetaceans, evaluating taxonomic coverage, geographic representation, metadata completeness, and the distribution of five commonly targeted mitochondrial markers (12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, D-loop, cytochrome oxidase I, and cytochrome b). We retrieved 17,569 cetacean accessions from the NCBI Nucleotide database and an additional 259 COI-only records from BOLD Systems. Sequence availability was strongly biased toward Delphinidae and Balaenopteridae, whereas several families, notably Ziphiidae, were markedly underrepresented. We also identified discrepancies between database records and currently accepted cetacean taxonomy (e.g., outdated genera, non-accepted species, and collapsed higher-level taxa). Among markers, the D-loop dominated database representation, largely as standalone sequences (12,437 records), reflecting historical and current sequencing priorities and underscoring its continued relevance for population-level studies and eDNA marker development. Only 38% of accessions included geographic metadata, with georeferenced records concentrated primarily in the Americas and the Northwest Pacific, while large regions, including much of Africa, remained poorly represented. Although broad geographic patterns mirrored known family distributions, pronounced regional and taxonomic gaps persist. Our results highlight critical deficiencies in mitochondrial reference databases for cetaceans and emphasise the need for improved metadata standards, targeted sequencing of underrepresented taxa and regions, and open data sharing to enhance the effectiveness and global applicability of eDNA-based cetacean monitoring.
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.