MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

eDNA in subterranean ecosystems: Applications, technical aspects, and future prospects

2022· review· en· W4205833254 on OpenAlexaff
Mattia Saccò, Michelle T. Guzik, Mieke van der Heyde, Paul Nevill, Steven J. Cooper, Andrew D. Austin, Peterson J. Coates, Morten E. Allentoft, Nicole E. White

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science of The Total Environment · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersCurtin University of TechnologyChevron AustraliaUniversity of AdelaideAustralian Research CouncilFlinders University
KeywordsEnvironmental DNABiodiversityBiotaEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementEcologyBiologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring of biota is pivotal for the assessment and conservation of ecosystems. Environments worldwide are being continuously and increasingly exposed to multiple adverse impacts, and the accuracy and reliability of the biomonitoring tools that can be employed shape not only the present, but more importantly, the future of entire habitats. The analysis of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding data provides a quick, affordable, and reliable molecular approach for biodiversity assessments. However, while extensively employed in aquatic and terrestrial surface environments, eDNA-based studies targeting subterranean ecosystems are still uncommon due to the lack of accessibility and the cryptic nature of these environments and their species. Recent advances in genetic and genomic analyses have established a promising framework for shedding new light on subterranean biodiversity and ecology. To address current knowledge and the future use of eDNA methods in groundwaters and caves, this review explores conceptual and technical aspects of the application and its potential in subterranean systems. We briefly introduce subterranean biota and describe the most used traditional sampling techniques. Next, eDNA characteristics, application, and limitations in the subsurface environment are outlined. Last, we provide suggestions on how to overcome caveats and delineate some of the research avenues that will likely shape this field in the near future. We advocate that eDNA analyses, when carefully conducted and ideally combined with conventional sampling techniques, will substantially increase understanding and enable crucial expansion of subterranean community characterisation. Given the importance of groundwater and cave ecosystems for nature and humans, eDNA can bring to the surface essential insights, such as study of ecosystem assemblages and rare species detection, which are critical for the preservation of life below, as well as above, the ground.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations90
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Science of The Total EnvironmentSame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207