ArticleMolecular ecology resources2026
Getting to the Core of the Matter-Assessing the Role of Replication in Metabarcoding-Based sedaDNA.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Replication is central to most experimental and sampling designs, increasing inferential power and capturing fine-scale data heterogeneity. However, its importance remains poorly evaluated in some ecological and evolutionary settings. This is the case of metabarcoding studies using DNA recovered from sedimentary archives, in which biological signals integrate ecological information through depositional and burial processes, yet are commonly inferred from a single sediment core per site. Here, we evaluated the effect of different types of replication using sedimentary DNA metabarcoding data from two genetic markers (mitochondrial COI and nuclear 18S) using a nested sampling design. The design included three intertidal sites, three spatially separated sediment cores per site (biological replicates), two sediment horizons per core, and eight PCR (technical) replicates per sediment sample. Variance partitioning showed that site identity and sediment age group together explained > 70% of the variation in beta diversity, indicating that among-site spatial and stratigraphic differences were the dominant drivers of community composition. PERMANOVA likewise identified non-significant effects of biological replication. Among PCR replicates from the same sediment sample, richness varied substantially, whereas Shannon diversity was more consistent. Despite this variability, differences in community composition among technical replicates remained smaller than those associated with biological replication or site identity, indicating a limited influence on broader ecological patterns. Community composition was highly similar among replicate cores within sites, consistent with stratigraphic coherence. These results indicate limited within-site heterogeneity and suggest that, under stratigraphically coherent conditions, increasing biological replication may provide little additional information, whereas enhancing technical replication and stratigraphic resolution can improve ecological inference from sedimentary DNA metabarcoding datasets.
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.