The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Biodiversity soup: metabarcoding of arthropods for rapid biodiversity assessment and biomonitoring
Open accessAbstract
Summary: 1. Traditional biodiversity assessment is costly in time, money and taxonomic expertise. Moreover, data are frequently collected in ways (e.g. visual bird lists) that are unsuitable for auditing by neutral parties, which is necessary for dispute resolution. 2. We present protocols for the extraction of ecological, taxonomic and phylogenetic information from bulk samples of arthropods. The protocols combine mass trapping of arthropods, mass‐PCR amplification of the COI barcode gene, pyrosequencing and bioinformatic analysis, which together we call ‘metabarcoding’. 3. We construct seven communities of arthropods (mostly insects) and show that it is possible to recover a substantial proportion of the original taxonomic information. We further demonstrate, for the first time, that metabarcoding allows for the precise estimation of pairwise community dissimilarity (beta diversity) and within‐community phylogenetic diversity (alpha diversity), despite the inevitable loss of taxonomic information inherent to metabarcoding. 4. Alpha and beta diversity metrics are the raw materials of ecology and the environmental sciences, facilitating assessment of the state of the environment with a broad and efficient measure of biodiversity.
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
QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data
Caporaso, J. G., Kuczynski, J., Stombaugh, J., Bittinger, K., Bushman, F. D., Costello, E. K., Fierer, N., Peña, A. G., Goodrich, J. K., Gordon, J. I., et al. (2010) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.f.303 · Cited by 34,887
Greengenes, a Chimera-Checked 16S rRNA Gene Database and Workbench Compatible with ARB
DeSantis, T. Z., Hugenholtz, P., Larsen, N., Rojas, M., Brodie, E. L., Keller, K., Huber, T., Dalevi, D., Hu, P., & Andersen, G. L. (2006) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.03006-05 · Cited by 10,891
Hajibabaei, M., Shokralla, S., Zhou, X., Singer, G. A. C., & Baird, D. J. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017497 · Cited by 584
Cited by
Elbrecht, V., & Leese, F. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0130324 · Cited by 765
Reliable, 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
Self-citationPiñol, J., Mir, G., Gomez‐Polo, P., & Agustí, N. (2015) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12355 · Cited by 423
Elbrecht, V., Vamos, E. E., Meissner, K., Aroviita, J., & Leese, F. (2017) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12789 · Cited by 385
Environmental 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
- Yu, D. W., Ji, Y., Emerson, B. C., Wang, X., Ye, C., Yang, C., & Ding, Z.
- Venue
- Methods in Ecology and Evolution
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-05-03
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 613-623
- ISSN
- 2041-210X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1582907243
- Cited by
- 744
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 26.16
- 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: Biodiversity soup: metabarcoding of arthropods for rapid biodiversity assessment and biomonitoring. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00198.x
- The paper
- Yu, D. W., Ji, Y., Emerson, B. C., Wang, X., Ye, C., Yang, C., & Ding, Z. (2012). Biodiversity soup: metabarcoding of arthropods for rapid biodiversity assessment and biomonitoring. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00198.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.
