Comparing eDNA metabarcoding and species collection for documenting Arctic metazoan biodiversity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Arctic biodiversity has long been poorly documented and is now facing rapid transformations due to ongoing climate change and other impacts, including shipping activities. These changes are placing marine coastal invertebrate communities at greater risk, especially in sensitive areas such as commercial ports. Preserving biodiversity is a significant challenge, going far beyond the protection of charismatic species and involving suitable knowledge of the spatiotemporal organization of species. Therefore, knowledge of alpha, beta, and gamma biodiversity is of great importance to achieve this objective, particularly when partnered with new cost‐effective approaches to monitor biodiversity. Method and results This study compares metabarcoding of COI mitochondrial and 18S rRNA genes from environmental DNA (eDNA) water samples with standard invertebrate species collection methods to document community patterns at multiple spatial scales. Water samples (250 ml) were collected at three different depths within three Canadian Arctic ports: Churchill, MB; Iqaluit, NU; and Deception Bay, QC. From these samples, 202 genera distributed across more than 15 phyla were detected using eDNA metabarcoding, of which only 9%–15% were also identified through species collection at the same sites. Significant differences in taxonomic richness and community composition were observed between eDNA and species collections at both local and regional scales. This study shows that eDNA dispersion in the Arctic Ocean reduces beta diversity in comparison with species collections while emphasizing the importance of pelagic life stages for eDNA detection. Conclusion The study also highlights the potential of eDNA metabarcoding to assess large‐scale Arctic marine invertebrate diversity while emphasizing that eDNA and species collection should be considered as complementary tools to provide a more holistic picture of coastal marine invertebrate communities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it