The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring rDNA diversity in eukaryotic microbial systems: how intragenomic variation, pseudogenes, and PCR artifacts confound biodiversity estimates
Abstract
Molecular approaches have revolutionized our ability to study the ecology and evolution of micro‐organisms. Among the most widely used genetic markers for these studies are genes and spacers of the rDNA operon. However, the presence of intragenomic rDNA variation, especially among eukaryotes, can potentially confound estimates of microbial diversity. To test this hypothesis, bacterially cloned PCR products of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region from clonal isolates of Symbiodinium, a large genus of dinoflagellates that live in symbiosis with many marine protists and invertebrate metazoa, were sequenced and analysed. We found widely differing levels of intragenomic sequence variation and divergence in representatives of Symbiodinium clades A to E, with only a small number of variants attributed to Taq polymerase/bacterial cloning error or PCR chimeras. Analyses of 5.8S‐rDNA and ITS2 secondary structure revealed that some variants possessed base substitutions and/or indels that destabilized the folded form of these molecules; given the vital nature of secondary structure to the function of these molecules, these likely represent pseudogenes. When similar controls were applied to bacterially cloned ITS sequences from a recent survey of Symbiodinium diversity in Hawaiian Porites spp., most variants (~87.5%) possessed unstable secondary structures, had unprecedented mutations, and/or were PCR chimeras. Thus, data obtained from sequencing of bacterially cloned rDNA genes can substantially exaggerate the level of eukaryotic microbial diversity inferred from natural samples if appropriate controls are not applied. These considerations must be taken into account when interpreting sequence data generated by bacterial cloning of multicopy genes such as rDNA.
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
Mfold web server for nucleic acid folding and hybridization prediction
Zuker, M. (2003) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkg595 · Cited by 13,404
Prokaryotic Diversity--Magnitude, Dynamics, and Controlling Factors
Torsvik, V., Øvreås, L., & Thingstad, T. F. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1071698 · Cited by 1,196
Cited by
The role of ciliate protozoa in the rumen
Newbold, C. J., de la Fuente, G., Belanche, A., Ramos-Morales, E., & McEwan, N. R. (2015) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2015.01313 · Cited by 637
Voolstra, C. R., & Ziegler, M. (2020) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.202000004 · Cited by 303
Thornhill, D. J., Lewis, A. M., Wham, D. C., & LaJeunesse, T. C. (2014) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/evo.12270 · Cited by 274
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- THORNHILL, D. J., LAJEUNESSE, T. C., & SANTOS, S. R.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 5326-5340
- ISSN
- 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-294X
- OpenAlex
- W2133603126
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.06
- 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: Measuring rDNA diversity in eukaryotic microbial systems: how intragenomic variation, pseudogenes, and PCR artifacts confound biodiversity estimates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03576.x
- The paper
- THORNHILL, D. J., LAJEUNESSE, T. C., & SANTOS, S. R. (2007). Measuring rDNA diversity in eukaryotic microbial systems: how intragenomic variation, pseudogenes, and PCR artifacts confound biodiversity estimates. Molecular Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03576.x
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.