SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL : FIGURE S1. Map of Antarctica and the Southern Ocean including year-round Australian stations. Sourced from the Australian Antarctic
Data Centre (https://data.aad.gov.au/map-catalogue/map/14159) under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License.
TABLE S1. Ranked list of marine species that represent the greatest perceived risk of arrival, establishment, and impact via the
Australian Antarctic Program.
TABLE S2. Ranked list of terrestrial invertebrate species that represent the greatest perceived risk of arrival, establishment, and impact
via the Australian Antarctic Program.
TABLE S3. Ranked list of terrestrial plant species that represent the greatest perceived risk of arrival, establishment, and impact via the
Australian Antarctic Program.
TABLE S4. Genetic resources currently available for priority species, including species-specific real-time PCR assays, and reference
sequences for DNA barcoding genes or mitochondrial/chloroplast genomes.Signatories to the Antarctic Treaty System’s Environmental Protocol are committed to
preventing incursions of non-native species into Antarctica, but systematic surveillance is rare.
Environmental DNA (eDNA) methods provide new opportunities for enhancing detection of
non-native species and biosecurity monitoring. To be effective for Antarctic biosecurity, eDNA
tests must have appropriate sensitivity and specificity to distinguish non-native from native
Antarctic species, and be fit-for-purpose. This requires knowledge of the priority risk species or
taxonomic groups for which eDNA surveillance will be informative, validated eDNA assays
for those species or groups, and reference DNA sequences for both target non-native and
related native Antarctic species. Here, we used an expert elicitation process and decision-by-
consensus approach to identify and assess priority biosecurity risks for the Australian Antarctic
Program (AAP) in East Antarctica, including identifying high priority non-native species and
their potential transport pathways. We determined that the priority targets for biosecurity
monitoring were not individual species, but rather broader taxonomic groups such as mussels
(Mytilus species), tunicates (Ascidiacea), springtails (Collembola), and grasses (Poaceae).
These groups each include multiple species with high risks of introduction to and/or
establishment in Antarctica. The most appropriate eDNA methods for the AAP must be capable
of detecting a range of species within these high-risk groups (e.g., eDNA metabarcoding). We
conclude that the most beneficial Antarctic eDNA biosecurity applications include surveillance
of marine species in nearshore environments, terrestrial invertebrates, and biofouling species on
vessels visiting Antarctica. An urgent need exists to identify suitable genetic markers for
detecting priority species groups, establish baseline terrestrial and marine biodiversity for
Antarctic stations, and develop eDNA sampling methods for detecting biofouling organisms.A Science Innovation Project by the Department of Agriculture,
Water and the Environment’s Science Innovation Program; Australian Research Council; NERC core funding to the BAS Biodiversity,
Evolution and Adaptation Team and Environment Office; and Biodiversa ASICS funding.http://www.reabic.net/journals/mbi/Default.aspxhj2024Plant Production and Soil ScienceSDG-14:Life below wate
