↓ Skip to main content

Advances in DNA metabarcoding for food and wildlife forensic species identification

Overview of attention for article published in Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
174 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
419 Mendeley
Title
Advances in DNA metabarcoding for food and wildlife forensic species identification
Published in
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00216-016-9595-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martijn Staats, Alfred J. Arulandhu, Barbara Gravendeel, Arne Holst-Jensen, Ingrid Scholtens, Tamara Peelen, Theo W. Prins, Esther Kok

Abstract

Species identification using DNA barcodes has been widely adopted by forensic scientists as an effective molecular tool for tracking adulterations in food and for analysing samples from alleged wildlife crime incidents. DNA barcoding is an approach that involves sequencing of short DNA sequences from standardized regions and comparison to a reference database as a molecular diagnostic tool in species identification. In recent years, remarkable progress has been made towards developing DNA metabarcoding strategies, which involves next-generation sequencing of DNA barcodes for the simultaneous detection of multiple species in complex samples. Metabarcoding strategies can be used in processed materials containing highly degraded DNA e.g. for the identification of endangered and hazardous species in traditional medicine. This review aims to provide insight into advances of plant and animal DNA barcoding and highlights current practices and recent developments for DNA metabarcoding of food and wildlife forensic samples from a practical point of view. Special emphasis is placed on new developments for identifying species listed in the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) appendices for which reliable methods for species identification may signal and/or prevent illegal trade. Current technological developments and challenges of DNA metabarcoding for forensic scientists will be assessed in the light of stakeholders' needs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 419 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Iceland 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 410 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 76 18%
Researcher 61 15%
Student > Master 57 14%
Student > Bachelor 47 11%
Other 19 5%
Other 49 12%
Unknown 110 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 120 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 89 21%
Environmental Science 35 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 1%
Other 38 9%
Unknown 125 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,284,188
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#1,651
of 9,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,372
of 327,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#21
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,678 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,844 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.