The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DNA metabarcoding multiplexing and validation of data accuracy for diet assessment: application to omnivorous diet
Abstract
Ecological understanding of the role of consumer–resource interactions in natural food webs is limited by the difficulty of accurately and efficiently determining the complex variety of food types animals have eaten in the field. We developed a method based on DNA metabarcoding multiplexing and next‐generation sequencing to uncover different taxonomic groups of organisms from complex diet samples. We validated this approach on 91 faeces of a large omnivorous mammal, the brown bear, using DNA metabarcoding markers targeting the plant, vertebrate and invertebrate components of the diet. We included internal controls in the experiments and performed PCR replication for accuracy validation in postsequencing data analysis. Using our multiplexing strategy, we significantly simplified the experimental procedure and accurately and concurrently identified different prey DNA corresponding to the targeted taxonomic groups, with ≥60% of taxa of all diet components identified to genus/species level. The systematic application of internal controls and replication was a useful and simple way to evaluate the performance of our experimental procedure, standardize the selection of sequence filtering parameters for each marker data and validate the accuracy of the results. Our general approach can be adapted to the analysis of dietary samples of various predator species in different ecosystems, for a number of conservation and ecological applications entailing large‐scale population level diet assessment through cost‐effective screening of multiple DNA metabarcodes, and the detection of fine dietary variation among samples or individuals and of rare food items.
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
Reducing the Effects of PCR Amplification and Sequencing Artifacts on 16S rRNA-Based Studies
Schloss, P. D., Gevers, D., & Westcott, S. L. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027310 · Cited by 2,112
Cited by
Piñol, J., Mir, G., Gomez‐Polo, P., & Agustí, N. (2015) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12355 · Cited by 423
Multiple dimensions of dietary diversity in large mammalian herbivores
Kartzinel, T. R., & Pringle, R. M. (2020) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.13206 · Cited by 63
Global Systematic Review of Methodological Approaches to Analyze Coastal Shelf Food Webs
Kytinou, E., Sini, M., Issaris, Y., & Katsanevakis, S. (2020) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2020.00636 · Cited by 17
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
- De Barba, M., Miquel, C., Boyer, F., Mercier, C., Rioux, D., Coissac, E., & Taberlet, P.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology Resources
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-11-16
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 306-323
- ISSN
- 1755-098X (ISSN-L)
- 1755-0998
- OpenAlex
- W1994283123
- Cited by
- 566
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.