Back

The JEDI marker as a universal measure of planetary biodiversity

Priest, T.; Henry, N.; Thomas, W.; Planat, L.; Rousseau, C.; Dittami, S. M.; Yeh, Y.-C.; Needham, D. M.; Ruscheweyh, H.-J.; Rigaut-Jalabert, F.; Simon, N.; Romac, S.; Le Gall, F.; Beavis, T.; Moog, K.; Moussy, A.; Da Silva, C.; Belser, C.; Korbel, J. O.; Siano, R.; Poulain, J.; Wincker, P.; Bertucci, P.; Bork, P.; Fuhrman, J. A.; Vincent, F.; Sunagawa, S.; de Vargas, C.

2025-08-13 ecology
10.1101/2025.08.11.669668 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Despite its critical importance in the formation and maintenance of ecosystems and homeostasis on Earth, biodiversity remains a complex and non-unified concept. Consequently, standards for measuring global biodiversity are lacking, hindering our capacity to document Earths biota and track its change. Here, we propose the Joint, cellular life-Encompassing DIversity (JEDI) marker as a simple, effective and quantitative measure to assess and monitor biodiversity. The JEDI marker is a ribosomal RNA gene fragment that can be amplified from all domains of life using a single pair of PCR primers. We demonstrate the applicability and effectiveness of this approach for assessing biodiversity across ecological and biological scales, from holobionts to diverse ecosystems. In addition, we provide an automated bioinformatic workflow to support the standardised and reproducible analysis of the JEDI marker in future studies. While this approach is not free from trade-offs, we argue that its advantages outweigh its limitations by providing a unique, operational and scalable solution that builds on established infrastructure to integrate the microbial majority into biodiversity assessments and provide fundamental insights into organismal dynamics and associations across domains of life. Thus, the JEDI marker approach addresses the urgent need for a universal and standardised framework to effectively measure and monitor biodiversity at planetary scales in an era of profound global change.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.