Assessment of Leaf-Litter Invertebrate Biodiversity Using High Throughput Sequencing

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,871 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Leaf litter ecosystems and their fauna are largely understudied, despite their critical ecological roles. Here, we investigate challenges associated with estimating biodiversity in terrestrial leaf litter. Current methodologies for biodiversity assessment are fraught with limitations, amongst the most significant is a decline in taxonomic expertise, complicating the process of species identification and the significant costs associated with species-level morphological identifications. DNA barcoding employs the mitochondrial gene cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) to identify animal species, and DNA metabarcoding facilitates the identification of multiple species without necessitating taxonomic expertise. Recent studies indicate that environmental DNA (eDNA) may exhibit greater sensitivity compared to traditional methods. To test whether these methods work in a real-world application, we sampled leaf litter across a temperate forest/field ecotone. Leaf litter was dried, ground and processed to extract environmental DNA. We evaluated the DNA extraction protocols to test their relative efficacy. We found that the Qiagen Blood and Tissue Kit was the most effective at recovering invertebrate diversity and that there were notable differences in biodiversity between forest and field habitats. Temperature emerged as a significant factor influencing the composition of the communities observed. Our methodology is applicable across various environments for efficient biodiversity assessment and might be particularly beneficial for monitoring pests and invasive species. Our approach offers a cost-effective and timely alternative to conventional biodiversity assessment methods and underscores the significance of accurate assessment methodologies for leaf litter communities. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00