Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Who is eating what: diet assessment using next generation sequencing

Open access
POMPANON, FRANCOIS, DEAGLE, BRUCE E., SYMONDSON, WILLIAM O. C., BROWN, DAVID S., JARMAN, SIMON N., TABERLET, PIERRE·2012·Molecular Ecology

Abstract

The analysis of food webs and their dynamics facilitates understanding of the mechanistic processes behind community ecology and ecosystem functions. Having accurate techniques for determining dietary ranges and components is critical for this endeavour. While visual analyses and early molecular approaches are highly labour intensive and often lack resolution, recent DNA‐based approaches potentially provide more accurate methods for dietary studies. A suite of approaches have been used based on the identification of consumed species by characterization of DNA present in gut or faecal samples. In one approach, a standardized DNA region (DNA barcode) is PCR amplified, amplicons are sequenced and then compared to a reference database for identification. Initially, this involved sequencing clones from PCR products, and studies were limited in scale because of the costs and effort required. The recent development of next generation sequencing (NGS) has made this approach much more powerful, by allowing the direct characterization of dozens of samples with several thousand sequences per PCR product, and has the potential to reveal many consumed species simultaneously (DNA metabarcoding). Continual improvement of NGS technologies, on‐going decreases in costs and current massive expansion of reference databases make this approach promising. Here we review the power and pitfalls of NGS diet methods. We present the critical factors to take into account when choosing or designing a suitable barcode. Then, we consider both technical and analytical aspects of NGS diet studies. Finally, we discuss the validation of data accuracy including the viability of producing quantitative data.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-294x.2011.05403.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,293

Metadata

Authors
POMPANON, F., DEAGLE, B. E., SYMONDSON, W. O. C., BROWN, D. S., JARMAN, S. N., & TABERLET, P.
Venue
Molecular Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-12-15
Volume
21
Issue
8
Pages
1931-1950
ISSN
  • 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-294X
OpenAlex
W2114259093
Cited by
1,293
References
1
FWCI
38.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Who is eating what: diet assessment using next generation sequencing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2011.05403.x
The paper
POMPANON, F., DEAGLE, B. E., SYMONDSON, W. O. C., BROWN, D. S., JARMAN, S. N., & TABERLET, P. (2012). Who is eating what: diet assessment using next generation sequencing. Molecular Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2011.05403.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.