The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scrutinizing key steps for reliable metabarcoding of environmental samples
Abstract
Metabarcoding of environmental samples has many challenges and limitations that require carefully considered laboratory and analysis workflows to ensure reliable results. We explore how decisions regarding study design, laboratory set‐up, and bioinformatic processing affect the final results, and provide guidelines for reliable study of environmental samples. We evaluate the performance of four primer sets targeting COI and 16S regions characterizing arthropod diversity in bat faecal samples, and investigate how metabarcoding results are affected by parameters including: (1) number of PCR replicates per sample, (2) sequencing depth, (3) PCR replicate processing strategy (i.e. either additively, by combining the sequences obtained from the PCR replicates, or restrictively, by only retaining sequences that occur in multiple PCR replicates for each sample), (4) minimum copy number for sequences to be retained, (5) chimera removal, and (6) similarity thresholds for Operational Taxonomic Unit (OTU) clustering. Lastly, we measure within‐ and between‐taxa dissimilarities when using sequences from public databases to determine the most appropriate thresholds for OTU clustering and taxonomy assignment. Our results show that the use of multiple primer sets reduces taxonomic biases and increases taxonomic coverage. Taxonomic profiles resulting from each primer set are principally affected by how many PCR replicates are carried out per sample and how sequences are filtered across them, the sequence copy number threshold and the OTU clustering threshold. We also report considerable diversity differences between PCR replicates from each sample. Sequencing depth increases the dissimilarity between PCR replicates unless the bioinformatic strategies to remove allegedly artefactual sequences are adjusted according to the number of analysed sequences. Finally, we show that the appropriate identity thresholds for OTU clustering and taxonomy assignment differ between markers. Metabarcoding of complex environmental samples ideally requires (1) investigation of whether more than one primer sets targeting the same taxonomic group is needed to offset primer biases, (2) more than one PCR replicate per sample, (3) bioinformatic processing of sequences that balance diversity detection with removal of artefactual sequences, and (4) empirical selection of OTU clustering and taxonomy assignment thresholds tailored to each marker and the obtained taxa.
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
Cytoscape: A software Environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks
Shannon, P., Markiel, A., Ozier, O., Baliga, N. S., Wang, J. T., Ramage, D., Amin, N., Schwikowski, B., & Ideker, T. (2003) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.1239303 · Cited by 51,888
bold : The Barcode of Life Data System (http://www.barcodinglife.org)
RATNASINGHAM, S., & HEBERT, P. D. N. (2007) · Molecular Ecology Notes · doi:10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01678.x · Cited by 6,376
Barcoding animal life: cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species
Hebert, P. D. N., Ratnasingham, S., & de Waard, J. R. (2003) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2003.0025 · Cited by 4,466
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
Environmental DNA for wildlife biology and biodiversity monitoring
Bohmann, K., Evans, A., Gilbert, M. T. P., Carvalho, G. R., Creer, S., Knapp, M., Yu, D. W., & de Bruyn, M. (2014) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2014.04.003 · Cited by 1,348
Self-citationWho is eating what: diet assessment using next generation sequencing
POMPANON, F., DEAGLE, B. E., SYMONDSON, W. O. C., BROWN, D. S., JARMAN, S. N., & TABERLET, P. (2012) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2011.05403.x · Cited by 1,293
Kunin, V., Engelbrektson, A., Ochman, H., & Hugenholtz, P. (2010) · Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1462-2920.2009.02051.x · Cited by 1,277
Geller, J., Meyer, C., Parker, M., & Hawk, H. (2013) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12138 · Cited by 1,101
DNA barcoding and metabarcoding of standardized samples reveal patterns of marine benthic diversity
Leray, M., & Knowlton, N. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1424997112 · Cited by 597
Taxon‐specific PCR for DNA barcoding arthropod prey in bat faeces
ZEALE, M. R. K., BUTLIN, R. K., BARKER, G. L. A., LEES, D. C., & JONES, G. (2011) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02920.x · Cited by 593
Cited by
Pauvert, C., Buée, M., Laval, V., Edel-Hermann, V., Fauchery, L., Gautier, A., Lesur, I., Vallance, J., & Vacher, C. (2019) · Fungal Ecology · doi:10.1016/j.funeco.2019.03.005 · Cited by 253
Skelton, J., Cauvin, A., & Hunter, M. E. (2023) · Environmental DNA · doi:10.1002/edn3.355 · Cited by 99
Tournayre, O., Tian, H., Lougheed, D. R., Windle, M. J. S., Lambert, S., Carter, J., Sun, Z., Ridal, J., Wang, Y., Cumming, B. F., et al. (2024) · Environmental DNA · doi:10.1002/edn3.590 · Cited by 13
Keel, D. J., Karpenko, K., Blankenship, S. M., Schumer, G., O’Rourke, O., Ostberg, C. O., Chase, D. A., & Duda, J. J. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-07042-1 · Cited by 3
Yu, Y., Shao, M., Zhou, H., Su, F., Guan, P., Ding, L., Ma, T., Zhou, B., Xu, S., Song, S., et al. (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-32964-1 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Alberdi, A., Aizpurua, O., Gilbert, M. T. P., & Bohmann, K.
- Venue
- Methods in Ecology and Evolution
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-08-03
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 134-147
- ISSN
- 2041-210X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2724989966
- Cited by
- 688
- References
- 36
- FWCI
- 37.07
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Scrutinizing key steps for reliable metabarcoding of environmental samples. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/2041-210x.12849
- The paper
- Alberdi, A., Aizpurua, O., Gilbert, M. T. P., & Bohmann, K. (2018). Scrutinizing key steps for reliable metabarcoding of environmental samples. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12849
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.