The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessing biodiversity of a freshwater benthic macroinvertebrate community through non-destructive environmental barcoding of DNA from preservative ethanol
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Characterizing biodiversity in a habitat or in targeted taxonomically or socioeconomically important groups remains a challenge. Standard DNA-based biodiversity identification tools such as DNA barcoding coupled with high-throughput Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies are rapidly changing the landscape of biodiversity analysis by targeting various habitats and a wide array of organisms. However, effective use of these technological advances requires optimized protocols and benchmarking against traditional tools. Here we investigate the use of commonly used preservative ethanol as a non-destructive and inexpensive source of DNA for NGS biodiversity analysis of benthic macroinvertebrates. We used the preservative ethanol added to field collected organisms (live sorted bulk benthic samples) as a source of community DNA for NGS environmental barcoding. We directly compare this approach with a DNA barcode library generated using Sanger sequencing of all individuals separated from abenthic sample as well as with NGS environmental barcoding of DNA extracted from mixed/homogenized tissue specimens of the same benthic sample. We also evaluate a multiplex PCR strategy, as compared to commonly used single amplicon workflow, using three newly designed primer sets targeting a wide array of benthic macroinvertebrate taxa. RESULTS: Our results indicate the effectiveness of ethanol-based DNA in providing sequence information from 87% of taxa identified individually from mixture as compared to 89% in conventional tissue extracted DNA. Missing taxa in both DNA sources were from species with the lowest abundance (e.g. 1 individual) in the benthic mixture. Interestingly, we achieved 100% detection for taxa represented with more than 1% individuals in the mixture in both sources of DNA. Our multiplex amplification regime increased the detection as compared to any single primer set indicating the usefulness of using multiple primer sets in initial amplification of target genes. CONCLUSIONS: Although NGS approaches have significantly increased the potential of using DNA information in biodiversity analysis, robust methods are needed to provide reliable data and alleviate sample-processing bottlenecks. Here we coupled non-destructive DNA access and a multiplex PCR approach in NGS environmental barcoding for effective data generation from benthic live-sorted samples collected in bulk and preserved in ethanol. Our study provides a possible solution to sampling and vouchering challenges in using benthic samples through next-generation environmental barcoding and facilitates wider utility of DNA information, especially species-specific DNA barcodes, in ecological and environmental studies and real-world applications such as biomonitoring programs.
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
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
Self-citationRanasinghe, J. A., Stein, E. D., Miller, P. E., & Weisberg, S. B. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040875 · Cited by 24
Cited by
Ruppert, K. M., Kline, R. J., & Rahman, M. S. (2019) · Global Ecology and Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00547 · Cited by 1,231
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
Ficetola, G. F., Pansu, J., Bonin, A., Coissac, E., Giguet‐Covex, C., De Barba, M., Gielly, L., Lopes, C. M., Boyer, F., Pompanon, F., et al. (2015) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12338 · Cited by 675
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
Metabarcoding vs. morphological identification to assess diatom diversity in environmental studies
Zimmermann, J., Glöckner, G., Jahn, R., Enke, N., & Gemeinholzer, B. (2015) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12336 · Cited by 317
Metadata
- Authors
- Hajibabaei, M., Spall, J. L., Shokralla, S., & van Konynenburg, S.
- Venue
- BMC Ecology
- Published
- 2012
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 28
- ISSN
- 1472-6785 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147734286
- Cited by
- 230
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Assessing biodiversity of a freshwater benthic macroinvertebrate community through non-destructive environmental barcoding of DNA from preservative ethanol. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1472-6785-12-28
- The paper
- Hajibabaei, M., Spall, J. L., Shokralla, S., & van Konynenburg, S. (2012). Assessing biodiversity of a freshwater benthic macroinvertebrate community through non-destructive environmental barcoding of DNA from preservative ethanol. BMC Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6785-12-28
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.