2019
DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2019.00240
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Field Evaluation of DNA Based Biodiversity Monitoring of Caribbean Mosquitoes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
(80 reference statements)
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The use of Culicidae-targeting primers is relevant to the growing number of biomonitoring initiatives that use aquatic environmental DNA (eDNA), which invariably contains substantial amounts of non-target DNA ( Schneider et al 2016 , Boerlijst et al 2019 , Krol et al 2019 ). By excluding most of the bycatch from amplification, such a protocol saves both time and financial resources.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of Culicidae-targeting primers is relevant to the growing number of biomonitoring initiatives that use aquatic environmental DNA (eDNA), which invariably contains substantial amounts of non-target DNA ( Schneider et al 2016 , Boerlijst et al 2019 , Krol et al 2019 ). By excluding most of the bycatch from amplification, such a protocol saves both time and financial resources.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, DNA metabarcoding has been tested as an effective alternative for vector and arbovirus surveillance, which is an issue that concerns public health (Schneider et al ., ). For example, early detection of mosquito vectors using water sample eDNA presented a comparable or higher detection probability to traditional surveys (Schneider et al ., ; Boerlijst et al ., ). There have also been some attempts at using DNA metabarcoding to conduct population genetics studies (Elbrecht et al ., ; Marshall & Stepien, ).…”
Section: Future Research and Challengesmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…All adult mosquitoes were morphologically identified by using newly developed keys (included after the Discussion), which were based on available specimens, species descriptions, and pre-existing identification keys for the region (such as: Lane, 1953;Van der Kuyp, 1954;Pratt, 1969;Belkin et al, 1970;Darsie et al, 2010;Gustave et al, 2018). All morphospecies from the sites were DNA barcoded as mini-barcodes for MT-CO1 by using a Culicid-specific primer (Boerlijst et al, 2019;Krol et al, 2019). Morphological identifications were checked by blasting the barcodes against the Barcode of Life Data (BOLD) System (version 4) and a reference database extracted from a small collection of pinned adults from Guadeloupe provided by one of the authors (FS) (RMNH.INS.1114107-134).…”
Section: Sampling and Identificationmentioning
confidence: 99%