MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414011374 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0331416

Using eDNA tools to examine the impact of kelp farming on underlying sediments

2025· article· en· W4414011374 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Tan, Emmaeve Jourdain, Shane Farrell, Nichole N. Price, Jeremy J. Rich, David Emerson

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersOffice of Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsKelpFisheryAgricultureKelp forestOceanographyEcologyBiologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using environmental DNA (eDNA)-based tools, we examined sediments underlying a ~ 1.25 hectare commercial kelp farm in the Gulf of Maine growing sugar kelp (Saccharina latissima) for two farming seasons, post-harvest. Two eDNA methods were used: a newly designed S. latissima-specific digital polymerase chain reaction (dPCR) assay targeting the cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) mitochondrial gene, as well as metabarcoding for the 16S and 18S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) genes, to examine overall bacterial, archaeal, and eukaryotic diversity. Sediment carbon and nitrogen content was analyzed using isotope ratio mass spectrometry (IRMS) as more traditional indicators of potential kelp biomass-derived nutrient enrichment in the benthos. When targeted sampling sites were added inside the footprint of the farm lease area in year two of the study, dPCR data showed subtle but significant differences between sediment samples inside and outside of the farm, with mean S. latissima COI gene copies from cores taken inside the farm being ~8% greater than mean values outside the farm. The highest COI copy numbers in marine sediments were from sites with observed accumulation of kelp biomass, while there was no conclusive difference in carbon and nitrogen content of those same sediment samples. Metabarcoding data also revealed subtle differences in taxa associated with sediments inside and outside the farm. For example, microbial taxa that correlated with kelp eDNA from cores within the farm included the families Rhodothermaceae, Rubritaleaceae, Flavobacteriaceae, Prolixibacteraceae, Nitrosomonadaceae, Nitrincolaceae and Rubinisphaeraceae. However, the majority of the above taxa were low in relative abundance, with only Flavobacteriaceae ranking among the top 30 most abundant and prevalent families in these sediments. In summary, this study demonstrates the sensitivity and specificity of eDNA tools to detect potential ecological and anthropogenic effects in marine sediments, beyond that of bulk nutrient and stable isotope analyses.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.174
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.133 · 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 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207