The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DNA from soil mirrors plant taxonomic and growth form diversity
Open accessAbstract
Ecosystems across the globe are threatened by climate change and human activities. New rapid survey approaches for monitoring biodiversity would greatly advance assessment and understanding of these threats. Taking advantage of next‐generation DNA sequencing, we tested an approach we call metabarcoding: high‐throughput and simultaneous taxa identification based on a very short (usually <100 base pairs) but informative DNA fragment. Short DNA fragments allow the use of degraded DNA from environmental samples. All analyses included amplification using plant‐specific versatile primers, sequencing and estimation of taxonomic diversity. We tested in three steps whether degraded DNA from dead material in soil has the potential of efficiently assessing biodiversity in different biomes. First, soil DNA from eight boreal plant communities located in two different vegetation types (meadow and heath) was amplified. Plant diversity detected from boreal soil was highly consistent with plant taxonomic and growth form diversity estimated from conventional above‐ground surveys. Second, we assessed DNA persistence using samples from formerly cultivated soils in temperate environments. We found that the number of crop DNA sequences retrieved strongly varied with years since last cultivation, and crop sequences were absent from nearby, uncultivated plots. Third, we assessed the universal applicability of DNA metabarcoding using soil samples from tropical environments: a large proportion of species and families from the study site were efficiently recovered. The results open unprecedented opportunities for large‐scale DNA‐based biodiversity studies across a range of taxonomic groups using standardized metabarcoding approaches.
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
Needleman, S. B., & Wunsch, C. D. (1970) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-2836(70)90057-4 · Cited by 11,288
Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the Year 2100
Sala, O. E., Stuart Chapin, F., III, Armesto, J. J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L. F., Jackson, R. B., et al. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.287.5459.1770 · Cited by 9,280
Cited by
Environmental DNA – An emerging tool in conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity
Thomsen, P. F., & Willerslev, E. (2015) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.019 · Cited by 2,082
Self-citationTowards next-generation biodiversity assessment using DNA metabarcoding
TABERLET, P., COISSAC, E., POMPANON, F., BROCHMANN, C., & WILLERSLEV, E. (2012) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2012.05470.x · Cited by 1,907
Self-citationReliable, verifiable and efficient monitoring of biodiversity via metabarcoding
Ji, Y., Ashton, L., Pedley, S. M., Edwards, D. P., Tang, Y., Nakamura, A., Kitching, R., Dolman, P. M., Woodcock, P., Edwards, F. A., et al. (2013) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12162 · Cited by 662
Fifty thousand years of Arctic vegetation and megafaunal diet
Willerslev, E., Davison, J., Moora, M., Zobel, M., Coissac, E., Edwards, M. E., Lorenzen, E. D., Vestergård, M., Gussarova, G., Haile, J., et al. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12921 · Cited by 569
Self-citationEnvironmental metabarcodes for insects: in silicoPCR reveals potential for taxonomic bias
Clarke, L. J., Soubrier, J., Weyrich, L. S., & Cooper, A. (2014) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12265 · Cited by 351
Metadata
- Authors
- YOCCOZ, N. G., BRÅTHEN, K. A., GIELLY, L., HAILE, J., EDWARDS, M. E., GOSLAR, T., Von STEDINGK, H., BRYSTING, A. K., COISSAC, E., POMPANON, F., SØNSTEBØ, J. H., MIQUEL, C., VALENTINI, A., De BELLO, F., CHAVE, J., THUILLER, W., WINCKER, P., CRUAUD, C., GAVORY, F., RASMUSSEN, M., GILBERT, M. T. P., ORLANDO, L., BROCHMANN, C., WILLERSLEV, E., & TABERLET, P.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-04-16
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 3647-3655
- ISSN
- 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-294X
- OpenAlex
- W2166717918
- Cited by
- 296
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 16.42
- 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
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.