MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413351456 · doi:10.3390/d17080585

Farmland Biodiversity Monitoring Using DNA Metabarcoding

2025· article· en· W4413351456 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dirk Steinke, Muhammad Ashfaq, Chris Ho, Kate Perez, Jayme E Sones, Stephanie deWaard, Jeremy R deWaard, Sujeevan Ratnasingham, Evgeny V. Zakharov, Paul D. N. Hebert

Bibliographic record

VenueDiversity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesOntario Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and TradeCanada First Research Excellence FundMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsBiodiversityEnvironmental DNABiologyAgroforestryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although 5–20% of global crop production is lost to arthropod damage, current biomonitoring programs are extremely limited. This study evaluates the feasibility of using metabarcoding to assess overall insect diversity and detect pest species in agricultural settings. It introduces a curated DNA barcode reference library for Canadian insects that are agricultural pests and applies it to metabarcoding data from the analysis of Malaise trap samples from two experimental farms in Southern Ontario. A total of 7707 arthropod species were collected across the two farms, and projections indicate that another 4000 await detection. These taxa included 231 registered pest species. The composition of the overall arthropod community composition was more heavily influenced by site location than crop type, but pest species composition was influenced by the crop. This study confirms that metabarcoding enables the evaluation of the species composition of arthropod communities in agroecosystems, allowing pest species to be tracked.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiversitySame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207