Cited by 1,907Environmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesIdentification and Quantification in FoodInvertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology

Towards next-generation biodiversity assessment using DNA metabarcoding

TABERLET, PIERRE, COISSAC, ERIC, POMPANON, FRANÇOIS, BROCHMANN, CHRISTIAN, WILLERSLEV, ESKE·2012·Molecular Ecology

Abstract

Virtually all empirical ecological studies require species identification during data collection. DNA metabarcoding refers to the automated identification of multiple species from a single bulk sample containing entire organisms or from a single environmental sample containing degraded DNA (soil, water, faeces, etc.). It can be implemented for both modern and ancient environmental samples. The availability of next‐generation sequencing platforms and the ecologists’ need for high‐throughput taxon identification have facilitated the emergence of DNA metabarcoding. The potential power of DNA metabarcoding as it is implemented today is limited mainly by its dependency on PCR and by the considerable investment needed to build comprehensive taxonomic reference libraries. Further developments associated with the impressive progress in DNA sequencing will eliminate the currently required DNA amplification step, and comprehensive taxonomic reference libraries composed of whole organellar genomes and repetitive ribosomal nuclear DNA can be built based on the well‐curated DNA extract collections maintained by standardized barcoding initiatives. The near‐term future of DNA metabarcoding has an enormous potential to boost data acquisition in biodiversity research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-294x.2012.05470.x

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
TABERLET, P., COISSAC, E., POMPANON, F., BROCHMANN, C., & WILLERSLEV, E.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • University of Oslo (NO)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
Corresponding author
TABERLET, PIERRE
Venue
Molecular Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-04
Volume
21
Issue
8
Pages
2045-2050
ISSN
  • 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-294X
OpenAlex
W2149415648
Cited by
1,907
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 111 · 2025: 183 · 2024: 208 · 2023: 181 · 2022: 222 · 2021: 190 · 2020: 159 · 2019: 140 · 2018: 175 · 2017: 106 · 2016: 78 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 9
FWCI
42.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Molecular Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Commission
  • Lundbeckfonden (R109-2012-9995, R70-2010-6286, R38-2008-3048, R24-2008-2527)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Identification and Quantification in Food
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
Keywords
DNA metabarcoding, biodiversity assessment, species identification, environmental DNA, ancient DNA, PCR-free sequencing, barcoding, ribosomal DNA, DNA sequencing technologies
MeSH terms
Ecology, Environmental Monitoring, Species Specificity, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Ecosystem, Biodiversity, DNA Barcoding, Taxonomic

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