English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Significant effort is spent on monitoring of benthic ecosystems through government funding or indirectly as a cost of business, and metabarcoding of environmental DNA samples has been suggested as a possible complement or alternative to current morphological methods to assess biodiversity. In metabarcoding, a public sequence database is typically used to match barcodes to species identity, but these databases are naturally incomplete. The North Sea oil and gas industry conducts large-scale environmental monitoring programs in one of the most heavily sampled marine areas worldwide and could therefore be considered a “best-case scenario” for macrofaunal metabarcoding. As a test case, we investigated the database coverage of two common metabarcoding markers, mitochondrial COI and the ribosomal rRNA 18S gene, for a complete list of 1802 macrofauna taxa reported from the North Sea monitoring region IV. For COI, species level barcode coverage was 50.4% in GenBank and 42.4% for public sequences in BOLD. For 18S, species level coverage was 36.4% in GenBank and 27.1% in SILVA. To see whether rare species were underrepresented, we investigated the most commonly reported species as a separate dataset but found only minor coverage increases. We conclude that compared to global figures, barcode coverage is high for this area, but that a significant effort remains to fill barcode databases to levels that would make metabarcoding operational as a taxonomic tool, including for the most common macrofaunal taxa.

Significant taxon sampling gaps in DNA databases limit the operational use of marine macrofauna metabarcoding