A comprehensive evaluation of taxonomic classifiers in marine vertebrate eDNA studies
Philipp E. BayeriD, Adam Bennett, Georgia NesteriD, Shannon L. CorriganiD, Eric J. RaesiD, Allison Skinner McInnesiD, Madalyn K. CooperiD, Marcelle E. AyadiD, Philip McVey, Anya KardailskyiD, Jessica R. PearceiD, Matthew W. FraseriD, Priscila GonçalvesiD, Stephen BurnelliD, Sebastian RauschertiD
Abstract
Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is a widely used tool for surveying marine vertebrate biodiversity. To this end, many computational tools have been released and a plethora of bioinformatic approaches are used for eDNA-based community composition analysis. Simulation studies and careful evaluation of taxonomic classifiers are essential to establish reliable benchmarks to improve accuracy and reproducibility of eDNA-based findings. Here we present a comprehensive evaluation of nine taxonomic classifiers exploring three widely used mitochondrial markers (12S rDNA, 16S rDNA, and COI) in Australian marine vertebrates. Curated reference databases and exclusion database tests were used to simulate diverse species compositions, including three positive control and two negative control datasets. Using these simulated datasets, we were able to identify between 19% to 85% of marine vertebrate species using mitochondrial markers. We show that MMSeqs2 and Metabuli generally outperform BLAST with 10% and 11% higher F1 scores for 12S and 16S rDNA markers, respectively, and that Naive Bayes Classifiers such as Mothur outperform sequence-based classifiers except MMSeqs2 for COI markers by 11%. Database exclusion tests reveal that MMSeqs2 and BLAST are less susceptible to false positives compared to Kraken2 with default parameters. Based on these findings, we recommend that MMSeqs2 is used for taxonomic classification of marine vertebrates given its ability to improve species-level assignments while reducing the number of false positives. Our work contributes to the establishment of best practices in eDNA-based biodiversity analysis to ultimately increase the reliability of this monitoring tool in the context of marine vertebrate conservation.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 9
- FWCI
- 2.95
- Field percentile
- top 10%
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- TRIDENT (Taxonomic Resolution and IDentification using Environmental dNa Traces): An Optimized Algorithm for Vertebrate Taxonomic Assignments in eDNA Metabarcoding, Integrating Molecular, Taxonomic, and Ecological Criteria
Rachel Haderlé, Gabriel Jung, … Jean‐Luc Jung·bioRxiv·Jun 30, 2026
- An automated workflow to assess completeness and curate GenBank for eDNA metabarcoding: the marine fish assemblage as case study
C. Claver, O. Canals, … N. Rodriguez-Ezpeleta·bioRxiv·Oct 26, 2022
- Novel Universal Primers For Metabarcoding eDNA Surveys Of Marine Mammals And Other Marine Vertebrates
E. Valsecchi, J. Bylemans, … P. Galli·bioRxiv·Sep 5, 2019
- eDNA in a bottleneck: obstacles to fish metabarcoding studies in megadiverse freshwater systems
J. M. Jackman, C. Benvenuto, … N. G. Sales·bioRxiv·Jan 5, 2021
- A novel degenerate primer set for eDNA metabarcoding of amphibians, turtles and fish
Torrey W. Rodgers, John R. Olson, … Karen E. Mock·Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater EcosystemsPeer-reviewed·Jun 26, 2025
- Environmental DNA analysis needs local reference data to inform taxonomy-based conservation policy:A case study from Aotearoa / New Zealand
P. Czechowski, M. de Lange, … M. Knapp·bioRxiv·Oct 22, 2021