Environmental DNA metabarcoding:Transforming how we survey animal and plant communities

The genomic revolution has fundamentally changed how we survey biodiversity on earth. High-throughput sequencing (?HTS?) platforms now enable the rapid sequencing of DNA from diverse kinds of environmental samples (termed ?environmental DNA? or ?eDNA?). Coupling HTS with our ability to associate sequences from eDNA with a taxonomic name is called ?eDNA metabarcoding? and offers a powerful molecular tool capable of noninvasively surveying species richness from many ecosystems. Here, we review the use of eDNA metabarcoding for surveying animal and plant richness, and the challenges in using eDNA approaches to estimate relative abundance. We highlight eDNA applications in freshwater, marine and terrestrial environments, and in this broad context, we distill what is known about the ability of different eDNA sample types to approximate richness in space and across time. We provide guiding questions for study design and discuss the eDNA metabarcoding workflow with a focus on primers and library preparation methods. We additionally discuss important criteria for consideration of bioinformatic filtering of data sets, with recommendations for increasing transparency. Finally, looking to the future, we discuss emerging applications of eDNA metabarcoding in ecology, conservation, invasion biology, biomonitoring, and how eDNA metabarcoding can empower citizen science and biodiversity educationpublishersversionPeer reviewe

Development and application of environmental DNA surveillance for the threatened crucian carp (Carassius carassius)

The crucian carp (Carassius carassius ) is one of few fish species associated with small ponds in the UK. These populations contain genetic diversity not found in Europe and are important to conservation efforts for the species which has declined across its range in Europe. Detection and monitoring of extant crucian carp populations are crucial for conservation success. Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis could be very useful in this respect as a rapid, cost‐efficient monitoring tool. We developed a species‐specific quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) assay for eDNA surveillance of crucian carp to enable non‐invasive, large‐scale distribution monitoring. We compared fyke netting and eDNA analysis at ponds with (n = 10) and without (n = 10) crucian carp for presence–absence detection. We examined biotic (crucian carp density represented by catch‐per‐unit‐effort [CPUE] estimate) and abiotic influences on eDNA detection probability using a hierarchical occupancy model, and eDNA quantification using a mixed‐effects model. eDNA analysis achieved 90% detection for crucian carp (n = 10), failing in only one pond where presence was known. CPUE estimate and conductivity had positive and negative influences on eDNA detection probability in qPCR replicates respectively. Similarly, conductivity had a negative effect on DNA copy number, whereas copy number increased with CPUE estimate. Our results demonstrate that eDNA analysis could enable detection of crucian carp populations in ponds and benefit ongoing conservation efforts, but imperfect species detection in relation to biotic and abiotic factors and eDNA workflow requires further investigation. Nonetheless, we have established an eDNA framework for the crucian carp as well as sources of imperfect detection which future investigations can build upon

Trade-Offs Between Reducing Complex Terminology and Producing Accurate Interpretations from Environmental DNA: Comment on “Environmental DNA: What\u27s behind the term?” by Pawlowski et al., (2020)

In a recent paper, “Environmental DNA: What\u27s behind the term? Clarifying the terminology and recommendations for its future use in biomonitoring,” Pawlowski et al. argue that the term eDNA should be used to refer to the pool of DNA isolated from environmental samples, as opposed to only extra-organismal DNA from macro-organisms. We agree with this view. However, we are concerned that their proposed two-level terminology specifying sampling environment and targeted taxa is overly simplistic and might hinder rather than improve clear communication about environmental DNA and its use in biomonitoring. This terminology is based on categories that are often difficult to assign and uninformative, and it overlooks a fundamental distinction within eDNA: the type of DNA (organismal or extra-organismal) from which ecological interpretations are derived

Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding of pond water as a tool to survey conservation and management priority mammals

Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding can identify terrestrial taxa utilising aquatic habitats alongside aquatic communities, but terrestrial species' eDNA dynamics are understudied. We evaluated eDNA metabarcoding for monitoring semi-aquatic and terrestrial mammals, specifically nine species of conservation or management concern, and examined spatiotemporal variation in mammal eDNA signals. We hypothesised eDNA signals would be stronger for semi-aquatic than terrestrial mammals, and at sites where individuals exhibited behaviours. In captivity, we sampled waterbodies at points where behaviours were observed (‘directed’ sampling) and at equidistant intervals along the shoreline (‘stratified’ sampling). We surveyed natural ponds (N = 6) where focal species were present using stratified water sampling, camera traps, and field signs. eDNA samples were metabarcoded using vertebrate-specific primers. All focal species were detected in captivity. eDNA signal strength did not differ between directed and stratified samples across or within species, between semi-aquatic or terrestrial species, or according to behaviours. eDNA was evenly distributed in artificial waterbodies, but unevenly distributed in natural ponds. Survey methods deployed at natural ponds shared three species detections. Metabarcoding missed badger and red fox recorded by cameras and field signs, but detected small mammals these tools overlooked, e.g. water vole. Terrestrial mammal eDNA signals were weaker and detected less frequently than semi-aquatic mammal eDNA signals. eDNA metabarcoding could enhance mammal monitoring through large-scale, multi-species distribution assessment for priority and difficult to survey species, and provide early indication of range expansions or contractions. However, eDNA surveys need high spatiotemporal resolution and metabarcoding biases require further investigation before routine implementation

Effective monitoring of freshwater fish

Freshwater ecosystems constitute only a small fraction of the planet’s water resources, yet support much of its diversity, with freshwater fish accounting for more species than birds, mammals, amphibians, or reptiles. Fresh waters are, however, particularly vulnerable to anthropogenic impacts, including habitat loss, climate and land use change, nutrient enrichment, and biological invasions. This environmental degradation, combined with unprecedented rates of biodiversity change, highlights the importance of robust and replicable programmes to monitor freshwater fish assemblages. Such monitoring programmes can have diverse aims, including confirming the presence of a single species (e.g. early detection of alien species), tracking changes in the abundance of threatened species, or documenting long-term temporal changes in entire communities. Irrespective of their motivation, monitoring programmes are only fit for purpose if they have clearly articulated aims and collect data that can meet those aims. This review, therefore, highlights the importance of identifying the key aims in monitoring programmes, and outlines the different methods of sampling freshwater fish that can be used to meet these aims. We emphasise that investigators must address issues around sampling design, statistical power, species’ detectability, taxonomy, and ethics in their monitoring programmes. Additionally, programmes must ensure that high-quality monitoring data are properly curated and deposited in repositories that will endure. Through fostering improved practice in freshwater fish monitoring, this review aims to help programmes improve understanding of the processes that shape the Earth's freshwater ecosystems, and help protect these systems in face of rapid environmental change