Extracting DNA from soil or directly from isolated nematodes indicate dissimilar community structure for Europe-wide forest soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nematodes are numerous in soils and play a crucial role in soil food-webs. DNA metabarcoding offers a time-effective alternative to morphology-based assessments of nematode diversity. However, it is unclear how different DNA extraction methods prior to metabarcoding could affect community analysis. We used soils with woody vegetation from a European latitudinal gradient (29 sites, 39 to 79°N, ∼4500 km, covering six biomes) to systematically evaluate the effect of two sources of nematode DNA either directly extracted from soils vs. extracted from nematodes previously isolated from soils hypothesizing that the DNA source material may produce different diversities, community structures and abundances of feeding types. Nematode-sample DNA exhibited a higher richness, while no difference in Shannon diversity was found between the approaches. The DNA sources also created significantly different community structures, with greater differences observed across soil-extracted DNA than nematode-sample DNA. The most overrepresented species in nematode-sample DNA were Heterocephalobus elongatus, Eucephalobus striatus and Hexatylus sp., whereas Phasmarhabditis sp. and Eumonhystera filiformis were overrepresented in soil-extracted DNA. Read abundances of feeding types significantly differed between the DNA sources and across sites, with a significant effect of biome on both ecto- and endoparasitic herbivores in soil-extracted DNA and for ectoparasitic herbivores only in nematode-sample DNA. Collectively, our data suggest that choice of the DNA source material may lead to different patterns of nematode community composition across space and environmental conditions. Improving the sensitivity of the soil-extracted DNA method by developing protocols using larger amounts of soil and designing nematode-specific primers will make this approach an efficient screening tool to analyse nematode diversity and community structure complementing the labour-intensive isolation of intact nematodes from soils (nematode-sample DNA).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".