Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 312

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

DNA metabarcoding of littoral hard-bottom communities: high diversity and database gaps revealed by two molecular markers

Open access
Wangensteen, Owen S., Palacín, Creu, Guardiola, Magdalena, Turon, Xavier·2018·PeerJ

Abstract

Biodiversity assessment of marine hard-bottom communities is hindered by the high diversity and size-ranges of the organisms present. We developed a DNA metabarcoding protocol for biodiversity characterization of structurally complex natural marine hard-bottom communities. We used two molecular markers: the “Leray fragment” of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase(COI), for which a novel primer set was developed, and the V7 region of the nuclear small subunit ribosomal RNA (18S). Eight different shallow marine littoral communities from two National Parks in Spain (one in the Atlantic Ocean and another in the Mediterranean Sea) were studied. Samples were sieved into three size fractions from where DNA was extracted separately. Bayesian clustering was used for delimiting molecular operational taxonomic units (MOTUs) and custom reference databases were constructed for taxonomic assignment. Despite applying stringent filters, we found high values for MOTU richness (2,510 and 9,679 MOTUs with 18S and COI, respectively), suggesting that these communities host a large amount of yet undescribed eukaryotic biodiversity. Significant gaps are still found in sequence reference databases, which currently prevent the complete taxonomic assignment of the detected sequences. In our dataset, 85% of 18S MOTUs and 64% of COI MOTUs could be identified to phylum or lower taxonomic level. Nevertheless, those unassigned were mostly rare MOTUs with low numbers of reads, and assigned MOTUs comprised over 90% of the total sequence reads. The identification rate might be significantly improved in the future, as reference databases are further completed. Our results show that marine metabarcoding, currently applied mostly to plankton or sediments, can be adapted to structurally complex hard bottom samples. Thus, eukaryotic metabarcoding emerges as a robust, fast, objective and affordable method to comprehensively characterize the diversity of marine benthic communities dominated by macroscopic seaweeds and colonial or modular sessile metazoans. The 18S marker lacks species-level resolution and thus cannot be recommended to assess the detailed taxonomic composition of these communities. Our new universal primers for COI can potentially be used for biodiversity assessment with high taxonomic resolution in a wide array of marine, terrestrial or freshwater eukaryotic communities.

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 · 10.7717/peerj.4705

Cites

55 of 55 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 55 references

Metadata

Authors
Wangensteen, O. S., Palacín, C., Guardiola, M., & Turon, X.
Venue
PeerJ
Publisher
PeerJ
Published
2018-05-04
Volume
6
Pages
e4705
ISSN
2167-8359 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2801860893
Cited by
312
References
55
FWCI
21.91
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: DNA metabarcoding of littoral hard-bottom communities: high diversity and database gaps revealed by two molecular markers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7717/peerj.4705
The paper
Wangensteen, O. S., Palacín, C., Guardiola, M., & Turon, X. (2018). DNA metabarcoding of littoral hard-bottom communities: high diversity and database gaps revealed by two molecular markers. PeerJ. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4705

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.