ArticleMolecular ecology resources2026
Surveying Biodiverse Coral Reef Ecosystems Across the Tree of Life With Environmental DNA.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A central challenge in evaluating biodiversity using environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is that each primer set has biases resulting in selective amplification of taxonomic diversity. Here we test 11 primer pairs to assess Central Pacific coral reef diversity in the five kingdoms of marine eukaryotes: Chromista, Fungi, Metazoa, Plantae and Protozoa. Zero-width OTUs (ZOTUs) were compared to public sequence databases and resolved to the finest taxonomic rank possible. Across all primers, we recovered 421 distinct taxa from five kingdoms in 35 phyla, comprising 62 classes. The number of taxa and taxonomic groups recovered varied widely. Nearly all primers recovered a large fraction of metazoan taxa, and several also recovered a large portion of taxa belonging to Chromista. Based on our results, most primers we tested here can be clustered into four groups: (1) the 'fish' primers, specialized for fishes, (2) the 'diverse' primers, which recover the highest number of identifications at lower taxonomic levels, (3) the 'general' primers, which perform moderately well across the tree of life, and (4) the algae primers. Taxonomic assignments tended to decrease with taxonomic rank, from 86%-100% at the phylum level to 35%-77% at the species level. Primers specialized for specific groups (i.e., fishes) tended to recover fewer taxa at higher taxonomic resolution, while more general primers tended to recover more taxa, though at lower taxonomic resolution. While each primer set proved uniquely informative for some taxa, the taxon recovery profiles provided here should aid researchers in matching the taxonomic specificity of environmental metabarcoding primers with research questions of interest.
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.