Metabarcoding From Microbes to Mammals: Comprehensive Bioassessment on a Global Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global biodiversity loss is unprecedented, and threats to existing biodiversity are growing. Given pervasive global change, a major challenge facing resource managers is a lack of scalable tools to rapidly and consistently measure Earth's biodiversity. Environmental genomic tools provide some hope in the face of this crisis, and DNA metabarcoding, in particular, is a powerful approach for biodiversity assessment at large spatial scales. However, metabarcoding studies are variable in their taxonomic, temporal, or spatial scope, investigating individual species, specific taxonomic groups, or targeted communities at local or regional scales. With the advent of modern, ultra-high throughput sequencing platforms, conducting deep sequencing metabarcoding surveys with multiple DNA markers will enhance the breadth of biodiversity coverage, enabling comprehensive, rapid bioassessment of all the organisms in a sample. Here, we report on a systematic literature review of 1,563 articles published about DNA metabarcoding and summarize how this approach is rapidly revolutionizing global bioassessment efforts. Specifically, we quantify the stakeholders using DNA metabarcoding, the dominant applications of this technology, and the taxonomic groups assessed in these studies. We show that while DNA metabarcoding has reached global coverage, few studies deliver on its promise of near-comprehensive biodiversity assessment. We then outline how DNA metabarcoding can help us move toward real-time, global bioassessment, illustrating how different stakeholders could benefit from DNA metabarcoding. Next, we address barriers to widespread adoption of DNA metabarcoding, highlighting the need for standardized sampling protocols, experts and computational resources to handle the deluge of genomic data, and standardized, open-source bioinformatic pipelines. Finally, we explore how technological and scientific advances will realize the promise of total biodiversity assessment in a sample—from microbes to mammals—and unlock the rich information genomics exposes, opening new possibilities for merging whole-system DNA metabarcoding with (1) abundance and biomass quantification, (2) advanced modeling, such as species occupancy models, to improve species detection, (3) population genetics, (4) phylogenetics, and (5) food web and functional gene analysis. While many challenges need to be addressed to facilitate widespread adoption of environmental genomic approaches, concurrent scientific and technological advances will usher in methods to supplement existing bioassessment tools reliant on morphological and abiotic data. This expanded toolbox will help ensure that the best tool is used for the job and enable exciting integrative techniques that capitalize on multiple tools. Collectively, these new approaches will aid in addressing the global biodiversity crisis we now face.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".