All

What are you looking for?

All
Projects
Results
Organizations

Quick search

  • Projects supported by TA ČR
  • Excellent projects
  • Projects with the highest public support
  • Current projects

Smart search

  • That is how I find a specific +word
  • That is how I leave the -word out of the results
  • “That is how I can find the whole phrase”

How to best detect threatened deadwood fungi Comparing metabarcoding and fruit body surveys

The result's identifiers

  • Result code in IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61388971%3A_____%2F24%3A00588260" target="_blank" >RIV/61388971:_____/24:00588260 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Result on the web

    <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320724002581?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320724002581?via%3Dihub</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110696" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110696</a>

Alternative languages

  • Result language

    angličtina

  • Original language name

    How to best detect threatened deadwood fungi Comparing metabarcoding and fruit body surveys

  • Original language description

    Effective conservation strategies are needed to prevent further loss of biodiversity. This requires a comprehensive assessment of species' presence, distribution, and population sizes. Such assessments can be extremely challenging for species-rich taxa, like fungi, which are difficult to detect and identify. In recent years, metabarcoding applied to environmental samples has proven to be a promising method for fungal detection. However, its potential against traditional fruit body surveys in monitoring threatened fungal species has rarely been tested. Here, we utilized data on deadwood-inhabiting fungi from 569 deadwood objects across five sites in Central Europe to compare the effectiveness of fruit body surveys and metabarcoding (of low and high sampling intensity) in detecting threatened species. Across objects, sites, and per object, metabarcoding was more effective in detecting threatened species than fruit body surveys, regardless of sampling intensity. Eleven percent of all threatened species across all objects and sites could be detected by both methods, 70 % exclusively by metabarcoding and 18 % exclusively by fruit body surveys. The number of species detected by both methods on the same object was <4 %. Effects of high sampling intensity metabarcoding were stronger than low sampling intensity at object level. The effectiveness of the survey method was mainly independent of deadwood object characteristics. We suggest that metabarcoding is a valuable tool for threatened fungal species monitoring and conservation status assessments. However, for a comprehensive assessment, fruit body surveys are still needed, as this method detected a unique set of species and indicates the presence of vital fungal individuals.

  • Czech name

  • Czech description

Classification

  • Type

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

  • CEP classification

  • OECD FORD branch

    10606 - Microbiology

Result continuities

  • Project

  • Continuities

    I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Others

  • Publication year

    2024

  • Confidentiality

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Data specific for result type

  • Name of the periodical

    Biological Conservation

  • ISSN

    0006-3207

  • e-ISSN

    1873-2917

  • Volume of the periodical

    296

  • Issue of the periodical within the volume

    August 2024

  • Country of publishing house

    NL - THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS

  • Number of pages

    13

  • Pages from-to

    110696

  • UT code for WoS article

    001270288700001

  • EID of the result in the Scopus database

    2-s2.0-85198086523