Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 433

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validation and Development of COI Metabarcoding Primers for Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment

Open access
Elbrecht, Vasco, Leese, Florian·2017·Frontiers in Environmental Science

Abstract

A central challenge in the present era of biodiversity loss is to assess and manage human impacts on freshwater ecosystems. Macroinvertebrates are an important group for bioassessment as many taxa show specific responses to environmental conditions. However, generating accurate macroinvertebrate inventories based on larval morphology is difficult and error-prone. Here, DNA metabarcoding provides new opportunities. Its potential to accurately identify invertebrates in bulk samples to the species level, has been demonstrated in several case studies. However, DNA based identification is often limited by primer bias, potentially leading to taxa in the sample remaining undetected. Thus, the success of DNA metabarcoding as an emerging technique for bioassessment critically relies on carefully evaluating primers. We used the R package PrimerMiner to obtain and process cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) sequence data for the 15 most globally relevant freshwater invertebrate groups for stream assessment. Using these sequence alignments, we developed four primer combinations optimized for freshwater macrozoobenthos. All primers were evaluated by sequencing ten mock community samples, each consisting of 52 freshwater invertebrate taxa. Additionally, popular metabarcoding primers from the literature and the developed primers were tested in silico against the 15 relevant invertebrate groups. The developed primers varied in amplification efficiency and the number of detected taxa, yet all detected more taxa than standard ‘Folmer’ barcoding primers. Two new primer combinations showed more consistent amplification than a previously tested ribosomal marker (16S) and detected all 42 insect taxa present in the mock community samples. In silico evaluation revealed critical design flaws in some commonly used primers from the literature. We demonstrate a reliable strategy to develop optimized primers using the tool PrimerMiner. The developed primers detected almost all taxa present in the mock samples, and we argue that high base degeneracy is necessary to decrease primer bias as confirmed by experimental results and in silico primer evaluation. We further demonstrate that some primers currently used in metabarcoding studies may not be suitable for amplification of freshwater macroinvertebrates. Therefore, careful primer evaluation and more region / ecosystem specific primers are needed before DNA metabarcoding can be used for routine bioassessment of freshwater ecosystems.

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 · 10.3389/fenvs.2017.00011

Cites

10 of 10 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 10 references

Cited by

See all 433

Metadata

Authors
Elbrecht, V., & Leese, F.
Venue
Frontiers in Environmental Science
Published
2017-04-10
Volume
5
ISSN
2296-665X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2387134834
Cited by
433
References
10
FWCI
30.66
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: Validation and Development of COI Metabarcoding Primers for Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fenvs.2017.00011
The paper
Elbrecht, V., & Leese, F. (2017). Validation and Development of COI Metabarcoding Primers for Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment. Frontiers in Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2017.00011

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.