scholarly journals Environmental DNA monitoring of noble crayfish Astacus astacus: Comparison and refining of methodology

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Strand ◽  
Stein Johnsen ◽  
Frode Fossøy ◽  
Johannes Rusch ◽  
Brett Sandercock ◽  
...  

During the past decade, environmental DNA (eDNA) methodology has become an important non-invasive tool to monitor aquatic micro- and macro-organisms, including freshwater crayfish. In Europe, noble crayfish Astacus astacus is the most widespread native freshwater crayfish. However, the species is threatened in its entire distribution range. It is therefore included on the International Union for Conservation Nature (IUCN) red list, and on several national red lists. Reliable monitoring is essential for implementation of conservation measures. For crayfish, traditional population trends have been obtained from catch per unit effort (CPUE) data. In order to successfully apply and use eDNA monitoring for noble crayfish, or any species, it is a prerequisite to know the strengths and weaknesses of the applied methods and how they perform compared to traditional methodology. Sampling strategy and analysis methodology also depends on choice of species to be monitored, and which questions to be answered. Further, refinement of the employed methods may improve the detection probability for eDNA monitoring. Here we report the results from 1) a recently published study on noble crayfish eDNA monitoring (Johnsen et al. 2020) and 2) an ongoing study comparing and optimising the methods used for monitoring noble crayfish. 1) We compared eDNA monitoring (transects with ten 5L samples) with traditional trapping (transects with 50 traps) for noble crayfish in lentic habitats, in order to evaluate detection probability and if eDNA concentration correlates with relative density of crayfish. We also compared two commonly used analytical methods [quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR)] for eDNA monitoring. We found that qPCR outperformed ddPCR in detection frequency (Fig. 1), most likely due to some inhibition in the ddPCR analysis. eDNA monitoring provided reliable presence/absence data for noble crayfish, even in lakes with very low crayfish densities. Detection frequency increased with increasing CPUE (Fig. 1). However, we did not observe any correlation between relative crayfish densities and eDNA concentrations of crayfish. eDNA concentrations were consistently very low, even in lakes with very high crayfish densities. For lakes with very low crayfish densities, we estimated that ~5 samples (5L samples) are needed for 95 % detection likelihood, while for lakes with high densities 2 samples were needed. 2) We compared two eDNA sampling strategies (sampling from bottom or the surface), commonly used for crayfish or fish in Norway to investigate how both strategies perform. The sampled filters were divided and two DNA extraction protocols were evaluated (CTAB based vs Column based). We found that the DNA yield was higher from the column based DNA extraction protocol, and that eDNA concentrations from fish (brown trout Salmon trutta, northern pike Esox lucius and European perch Perca fluviatilis) were significantly higher than for crayfish. For crayfish and brown trout, there was little difference between detection probability for bottom and surface samples, while for northern pike and European perch the detection probability was higher for the bottom samples. Currently, we are analysing eDNA samples collected with glass fibre filters and NatureMetrix filters for noble crayfish in both lentic and lotic habitats and the preliminary results will be presented. We conclude that eDNA monitoring cannot substitute CPUE monitoring for freshwater crayfish, but it offers reliable presence-absence data, provided sufficient sampling efforts. Thus, it is suitable for large scale monitoring of threatened crayfish and combined with eDNA analysis of alien crayfish and diseases such as crayfish plague, this is a cost-efficient supplement offering a more holistic approach for aquatic environments and native crayfish conservation. Furthermore, the synergy effect of using collected eDNA samples from different projects to monitor additional species is substantial.

2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (10) ◽  
pp. 891-898 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Orozova ◽  
I Sirakov ◽  
V Chikova ◽  
R Popova ◽  
A H Al-Harbi ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maciej Bonk ◽  
Rafał Bobrek ◽  
Jacek Dołęga ◽  
Witold Strużyński

Abstract Several methods of sampling are commonly used to detect freshwater crayfish (Decapoda: Malacostraca). Many of them are laborious, time-consuming, and require dedicated equipment. The aims of this contribution are i) to compare visual encounter surveys and baited trap success in the detection of the noble crayfish, Astacus astacus (L.), which is endangered in Poland, and ii) to assess the time needed to detect the invasive spiny-cheek crayfish, Orconectes limosus (Raf.). The study is based on data collected between 2016–2018 in various habitats of Astacus astacus and Orconectes limosus in Poland. Visual encounter surveys are at least as effective in assessing the presence of A. astacus as the trapping method. The modal value for the detection time of O. limosus at all sites and all surveys was two minutes. Sample rarefaction showed that one survey covered 11.33 (SD = 0.43) of a maximum of 12 detections per survey. This suggests that, despite some limitations, visual detection might be an efficient method for determining crayfish presence/absence for a wide range of applications.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stein I. Johnsen ◽  
David A. Strand ◽  
Johannes C. Rusch ◽  
Trude Vrålstad

Noble crayfish is the most widespread native freshwater crayfish species in Europe. It is threatened in its entire distribution range and listed on the International Union for Concervation Nature- and national red lists. Reliable monitoring data is a prerequisite for implementing conservation measures, and population trends are traditionally obtained from catch per unit effort (CPUE) data. Recently developed environmental DNA (eDNA) tools can potentially improve the effort. In the past decade, eDNA monitoring has emerged as a promising tool for species surveillance, and some studies have established that eDNA methods yield adequate presence-absence data for crayfish. There are also high expectations that eDNA concentrations in the water can predict biomass or relative density. However, eDNA studies for crayfish have not yet been able to establish a convincing relationship between eDNA concentrations and crayfish density. This study compared eDNA and CPUE data obtained the same day and with high sampling effort, and evaluated whether eDNA concentrations can predict relative density of crayfish. We also compared two analytical methods [Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and digital droplet PCR (ddPCR)], and estimated the detection probability for eDNA monitoring compared to trapping using occupancy modeling. In all lakes investigated, we detected eDNA from noble crayfish, even in lakes with very low densities. The eDNA method is reliable for presence-absence monitoring of noble crayfish, and the probability of detecting noble crayfish from eDNA samples increased with increasing relative crayfish densities. However, the crayfish eDNA concentrations were consistently low and mostly below the limit of quantification, even in lakes with very high crayfish densities. The hypothesis that eDNA concentrations can predict relative crayfish density was consequently not supported. Our study underlines the importance of intensified sampling effort for successful detection of very low-density populations, and for substantiating presumed absence, inferred from negative results. Surprisingly, we found a higher likelihood of eDNA detection using qPCR compared to ddPCR. We conclude that eDNA monitoring cannot substitute CPUE data, but is a reliable supplement for rapid presence-absence overviews. Combined with eDNA analyses of alien crayfish species and diseases such as crayfish plague, this is a cost-efficient supplement offering a more holistic monitoring approach for aquatic environments and native crayfish conservation.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shunsuke Matsuoka ◽  
Yoriko Sugiyama ◽  
Mariko Nagano ◽  
Hideyuki Doi

Background: Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is a rapidly expanding technique for efficient biodiversity monitoring, especially of animals. Recently, the usefulness of aquatic eDNA in monitoring the diversity of both terrestrial and aquatic fungi has been suggested. In eDNA studies, different experimental factors, such as DNA extraction kits or methods, can affect the subsequent analyses and the results of DNA metabarcoding. However, few methodological studies have been carried out on eDNA of fungi, and little is known about how experimental procedures can affect the results of biodiversity analysis. In this study, we focused on the effect of the DNA extraction method on fungal DNA metabarcoding using freshwater samples obtained from rivers and lakes. Methods: DNA was extracted from freshwater samples using the DNeasy PowerSoil kit, which is mainly used to extract microbial DNA from soil, and the DNeasy Blood & Tissue kit, which is commonly used for eDNA studies on animals. We then compared PCR inhibition and fungal DNA metabarcoding results [i.e., operational taxonomic unit (OTU) number and composition] of the extracted samples. Results: No PCR inhibition was detected in any of the samples, and no significant differences in the number of OTUs and OTU compositions were detected between the samples processed using different kits. These results indicate that both DNA extraction kits may provide similar diversity results for the river and lake samples evaluated in this study. Therefore, it may be possible to evaluate the diversity of fungi using a unified experimental method, even with samples obtained for diversity studies on other taxa such as those of animals.


PeerJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. e8287
Author(s):  
Amberly N. Hauger ◽  
Karmen M. Hollis-Etter ◽  
Dwayne R. Etter ◽  
Gary J. Roloff ◽  
Andrew R. Mahon

Invasive feral swine can damage ecosystems, disrupt plant and animal populations, and transmit diseases. Monitoring of feral swine populations requires expensive and labor-intensive techniques such as aerial surveys, field surveys for sign, trail cameras, and verifying landowner reports. Environmental DNA (eDNA) provides an alternative method for locating feral swine. To aid in detection of this harmful invasive species, a novel assay was developed incorporating molecular methods. From August 2017 to April 2018, water samples and stream data were collected along 400 m transects in two different stream types where swine DNA was artificially introduced to investigate potential factors affecting detection. A generalized linear model (family binomial) was used to characterize environmental conditions affecting swine DNA detection; detection was the dependent variable and stream measurements included stream type, distance downstream, water temperature, velocity, turbidity, discharge, and pH as independent variables. Parameters from the generalized linear model were deemed significant if 95% confidence intervals did not overlap 0. Detection probability for swine DNA negatively related to water temperature (β =  − 0.21, 95% CI [−0.35 to −0.09]), with the highest detection probability (0.80) at 0 °C and lowest detection probability (0.05) at 17.9 °C water temperature. Results indicate that sampling for swine eDNA in free-flowing stream systems should occur at lower water temperatures to maximize detection probability. This study provides a foundation for further development of field and sampling techniques for utilizing eDNA as a viable alternative to monitoring a terrestrial invasive species in northern regions of the United States.


2016 ◽  
Vol 196 (2) ◽  
pp. 206-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilles Luquet ◽  
Murielle Salomé ◽  
Andreas Ziegler ◽  
Céline Paris ◽  
Aline Percot ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document