The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Past, present, and future perspectives of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding: A systematic review in methods, monitoring, and applications of global eDNA
Open accessAbstract
Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is a novel method of assessing biodiversity wherein samples are taken from the environment via water, sediment or air from which DNA is extracted, and then amplified using general or universal primers in polymerase chain reaction and sequenced using next-generation sequencing to generate thousands to millions of reads. From this data, species presence can be determined, and overall biodiversity assessed. It is an interdisciplinary method that brings together traditional field-based ecology with in-depth molecular methods and advanced computational tools. As an emerging monitoring method, there are many pitfalls and roadblocks to be considered and avoided, but the method may still have the ability to revolutionize modern biodiversity surveys for the molecular era. In this paper, we review the basic methodology, benefits, and concerns of eDNA metabarcoding, and systematically cover the applications of the method in global ecology thus far, including biodiversity monitoring across all habitats and taxonomic groups, ancient ecosystem reconstruction, plant-pollinator interactions, diet analysis, invasive species detection, pollution responses, and air quality monitoring. We also discuss the future applications of the method as well as expected technological advances and how they may impact the way that eDNA metabarcoding may used in the future. eDNA metabarcoding is a unique method still in development and will likely remain in flux for some time as technology advances and procedures become standardized. However, as metabarcoding is optimized and its use becomes more widespread, it is likely to become an essential tool for ecological monitoring and global conservation study.
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
Cites
Metabarcoding vs. morphological identification to assess diatom diversity in environmental studies
Zimmermann, J., Glöckner, G., Jahn, R., Enke, N., & Gemeinholzer, B. (2015) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12336 · Cited by 317
Carew, M. E., Pettigrove, V. J., Metzeling, L., & Hoffmann, A. A. (2013) · Frontiers in Zoology · doi:10.1186/1742-9994-10-45 · Cited by 243
Cited by
How genomics can help biodiversity conservation
Theissinger, K., Fernandes, C., Formenti, G., Bista, I., Berg, P. R., Bleidorn, C., Bombarely, A., Crottini, A., Gallo, G. R., Godoy, J. A., et al. (2023) · Trends in Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.tig.2023.01.005 · Cited by 401
Molecular diversity of Uzbekistan’s fishes assessed with DNA barcoding
Sheraliev, B., & Peng, Z. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-96487-1 · Cited by 42
Metadata
- Authors
- Ruppert, K. M., Kline, R. J., & Rahman, M. S.
- Venue
- Global Ecology and Conservation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-01
- Volume
- 17
- Pages
- e00547
- ISSN
- 2351-9894 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2912959159
- Cited by
- 1,231
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 9.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Past, present, and future perspectives of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding: A systematic review in methods, monitoring, and applications of global eDNA. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00547
- The paper
- Ruppert, K. M., Kline, R. J., & Rahman, M. S. (2019). Past, present, and future perspectives of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding: A systematic review in methods, monitoring, and applications of global eDNA. Global Ecology and Conservation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00547
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.