【💡Editor's Choice】
Volatilization-related ammonia and fossil fuel nitrogen oxides emission sources are the major contributors to #AtmosphericNitrogenDeposition in the Mengshan area according to the #Mosses record.
#EnvironmentalChanges | #StableNitrogenIsotope | #Biomonitoring
Yang Wang et al. quantified the #HistoricalEnvironmentalChanges of #AtmosphericNitrogenDeposition in northern mountainous areas of China through #Moss.
✳️ #Mosses record historical variations of #AtmosphericNitrogenDeposition in a mountain area of northern China
Results:
1️⃣ 2012~2018: moss nitrogen(N) contents ⬆️, moss N isotope values ⬇️;
2️⃣ 2012~2022: total N deposition fluxes ⬆️.
Main sources:
1️⃣ volatilization-related ammonia
2️⃣ fossil fuel N oxides emission
#EnvironmentalChanges | #StableNitrogenIsotope | #Biomonitoring
Biomonitoring Humain Wallon (BMH-Wal) pour estimer l'exposition interne et globale des personnes aux substances (polluants, substances chimiques, pesticides, métaux...).
https://environnement.sante.wallonie.be/biomonitoring-wallon
Rapid field-based detection of a threatened and elusive species with environmental DNA and CRISPR-Dx
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989425001192?via%3Dihub
#environmentalDNA #eDNA #CRISPR #biodiversity #biomonitoring
The preliminary program for the AquaEcOmics symposium is now available: https://aquaecomics.symposium.inrae.fr/program2
#eDNA #omics #metagenomics #metabarcoding #dPCR #marine #freshwater #ecology #biomonitoring #aquaecomics2025
Make sure not to miss out and register before the 31th of January: https://aquaecomics.symposium.inrae.fr/
**Proficiency testing and cross-laboratory method comparison to support standardisation of diatom DNA metabarcoding for freshwater biomonitoring**
https://mbmg.pensoft.net/article/133264
#DNAmetabarcoding #standardization #freshwater #biomonitoring
DNA metabarcoding of benthic diatoms has been successfully applied for biomonitoring at the national scale and can now be considered technically ready for routine application. However, protocols and methods still vary between and within countries, limiting their transferability and the comparability of results. In order to overcome this, routine use of DNA metabarcoding for diatom biomonitoring requires knowledge of the sources of variability introduced by the different steps of the procedure. Here, we examine how elements of routine procedures contribute to variability between European laboratories. A set of four experiments were performed focusing on DNA extraction and PCR amplification steps to evaluate their reproducibility between different laboratories and the variability introduced by different protocols currently applied by the scientific community. Under the guidance of a reference laboratory, 17 participants from 14 countries performed DNA extraction and PCR amplification in parallel, using the same fixed protocol and their own choice of protocol. Experiments were performed by each participant on a set of standardised DNA and biofilm samples (river, lake and mock community) to investigate potential systematic and random errors. Our results revealed the successful transferability of a protocol amongst labs and a highly similar and consistent ecological assessment outcome obtained regardless of the protocols used by each participant. We propose an “all for one but prove them all” strategy, suggesting that distinct protocols can be used within the scientific community, as long as their consistency is be proven by following minimum standard requirements.
"Proficiency testing and cross-laboratory method comparison to support standardisation of diatom DNA metabarcoding for freshwater biomonitoring"
https://mbmg.pensoft.net/article/133264
#DNAmetabarcoding #standardization #ProficiencyTesting #biomonitoring
DNA metabarcoding of benthic diatoms has been successfully applied for biomonitoring at the national scale and can now be considered technically ready for routine application. However, protocols and methods still vary between and within countries, limiting their transferability and the comparability of results. In order to overcome this, routine use of DNA metabarcoding for diatom biomonitoring requires knowledge of the sources of variability introduced by the different steps of the procedure. Here, we examine how elements of routine procedures contribute to variability between European laboratories. A set of four experiments were performed focusing on DNA extraction and PCR amplification steps to evaluate their reproducibility between different laboratories and the variability introduced by different protocols currently applied by the scientific community. Under the guidance of a reference laboratory, 17 participants from 14 countries performed DNA extraction and PCR amplification in parallel, using the same fixed protocol and their own choice of protocol. Experiments were performed by each participant on a set of standardised DNA and biofilm samples (river, lake and mock community) to investigate potential systematic and random errors. Our results revealed the successful transferability of a protocol amongst labs and a highly similar and consistent ecological assessment outcome obtained regardless of the protocols used by each participant. We propose an “all for one but prove them all” strategy, suggesting that distinct protocols can be used within the scientific community, as long as their consistency is be proven by following minimum standard requirements.
Journal of Plant Ecology
Ingvar Santry
Artanux - Simon Lefort
Teresita Porter 🙋🏻♀️
AquaEcOmics