The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Pyrosequencing faecal DNA to determine diet of little penguins: is what goes in what comes out?
Open accessAbstract
DNA barcoding of faeces or stomach contents is an emerging approach for dietary analysis. We pyrosequenced mtDNA 16S markers amplified from faeces of captive little penguins (Eudyptula minor) to examine if recovered sequences reflect the proportions of species consumed. We also analysed wild little penguin faeces collected from 100 nests in southeast Australia. In the captive study, pilchards were the primary fish fed to the penguins and DNA sequences from pilchard were the most common sequences recovered. Sequences of three other fish fed in constant mass proportions (45:35:20) were all detected, but proportions of sequences (60:6:34) were considerably different than mass proportions in the diet. Correction factors based on relative mtDNA density in the fish did not improve diet estimates. Consistency between replicate samples suggests that the observed bias resulted from differences in prey digestibility. Detection of DNA from fish consumed before the penguins were brought into captivity indicates that a DNA signal in faeces can persist for at least 4 days after ingestion. In the wild-collected faeces, 24 distinct fish and 1 squid were identified; anchovy, barracouta and pilchard accounted for over 80% of these sequences. Our results highlight that DNA sequences recovered in dietary barcoding studies can provide semi-quantitative information on diet composition, but these data should be given wide confidence intervals.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Leray, M., Yang, J. Y., Meyer, C. P., Mills, S. C., Agudelo, N., Ranwez, V., Boehm, J. T., & Machida, R. J. (2013) · Frontiers in Zoology · doi:10.1186/1742-9994-10-34 · Cited by 1,636
Piñol, J., Mir, G., Gomez‐Polo, P., & Agustí, N. (2015) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12355 · Cited by 423
Camprasse, E. C. M., Sutton, G. J., Berlincourt, M., & Arnould, J. P. Y. (2017) · Marine Biology · doi:10.1007/s00227-017-3193-y · Cited by 27
Dietary DNA Metabarcoding From Animal Fecal Samples
McConnell, R. D., Jarrett, C., Ferreira, D. F., Powell, L. L., Quiñones, A. L. S., Dominoni, D. M., & Welch, A. J. (2026) · Current Protocols · doi:10.1002/cpz1.70226 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Deagle, B. E., Chiaradia, A., McInnes, J., & Jarman, S. N.
- Venue
- Conservation Genetics
- Published
- 2010-10
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2039-2048
- ISSN
- 1566-0621 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-9737
- OpenAlex
- W2061113965
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pyrosequencing faecal DNA to determine diet of little penguins: is what goes in what comes out? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10592-010-0096-6
- The paper
- Deagle, B. E., Chiaradia, A., McInnes, J., & Jarman, S. N. (2010). Pyrosequencing faecal DNA to determine diet of little penguins: is what goes in what comes out? Conservation Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-010-0096-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.