skip to main content


Title: Combining sampling gear to optimally inventory species highlights the efficiency of eDNA metabarcoding
Abstract

Biodiversity surveys may require the use of multiple types of sampling gear to maximize the efficiency of species detections, yet few studies have investigated how to optimally distribute effort among gear. In this study, we conducted eDNA metabarcoding and capture‐based sampling surveys (electrofishing, fyke netting, gillnetting, and seining) to sample fish species richness in a large northern temperate lake. We evaluated the success of the sampling methods individually and in combination to determine the allocation of effort and cost across sampling gear that provides the optimal approach for lake‐wide species inventories. We found that eDNA metabarcoding detected more species than any other sampling method, including 11 species that were not detected with any capture‐based approach. Optimal gear combination analyses revealed that detected species richness is maximized when most of the effort or budget is allocated to eDNA metabarcoding, with smaller allocations to seining and fyke netting. eDNA metabarcoding and capture sampling gear showed similar patterns of spatial heterogeneity in the fish community across habitat types, with pelagic samples forming a group that was distinct from nearshore samples. Our results indicate that eDNA metabarcoding is a rapid and cost‐efficient tool for biodiversity monitoring and that assessing the complementarity of multiple sampling types can inform the development of optimal approaches for measuring fish species richness.

 
more » « less
NSF-PAR ID:
10392118
Author(s) / Creator(s):
 ;  ;  ;  ;  
Publisher / Repository:
Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Environmental DNA
Volume:
5
Issue:
1
ISSN:
2637-4943
Page Range / eLocation ID:
p. 146-157
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. This data set is a derived data set based on fish catch data. Data are collected annually to enable us to track the fish assemblages of eleven primary lakes (Allequash, Big Muskellunge, Crystal, Sparkling, Trout, bog lakes 27-02 [Crystal Bog] and 12-15 [Trout Bog], Mendota, Monona, Wingra and Fish). Sampling on Lakes Monona, Wingra, and Fish started in 1995; sampling on other lakes started in 1981. Sampling is done at six littoral zone sites per lake with seine, minnow or crayfish traps, and fyke nets; a boat-mounted electrofishing system samples three littoral transects. Vertically hung gill nets are used to obtain two pelagic samples per lake from the deepest point. A trammel net samples across the thermocline at two sites per lake. In the bog lakes only fyke nets and minnow traps are deployed. Parameters measured include species-level identification and lengths for all fish caught, and weight and scale samples from a subset. Derived data sets include species richness, catch per unit effort, and size distribution by species, lake, and year. Protocol used to generate data: Day seines were only used in 1981 and have been eliminated from this data set to make sampling effort across years comparable. Number caught for each species is summed over repetitions of a gear within a lake and over depth. For information on fish stocking by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources in LTER lakes in Dane and Vilas counties, see https://dnr.wi.gov/fisheriesmanagement/Public/Summary/Index. Beach seining was discontinued after 2019. The only sampling done in 2020 were a single gill-netting sample in Sparkling, Crystal, and Trout lakes. Sampling in Fish Lake was missed in 2021 due to significant lake level changes. Data from the two bogs is missing in 2022. Sampling Frequency: annually. Number of sites: 11 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract Background Anadromous rainbow smelt ( Osmerus mordax ) have experienced a large range reduction in recent decades and the status of remnant spawning populations is poorly known in Maine, where these fish have significant ecological, cultural, and commercial relevance. Defining the remnant range of anadromous smelt is more difficult than for many declining fish species because adults are only ephemerally present while spawning in small coastal streams at night during spring runoff periods when traditional assessments can be unreliable or even hazardous. We hypothesized that eDNA might facilitate improved survey efforts to define smelt spawning habitat, but that detection could also face challenges from adult eDNA quickly flushing out of these small stream systems. We combined daytime eDNA sampling with nighttime fyke netting to ascertain a potential window of eDNA detection before conducting eDNA surveys in four streams of varying abundance. Hierarchical occupancy modeling was in turn employed to estimate eDNA encounter probabilities relative to numbers of sampling events (date), samples within events, and qPCR replicates within samples. Results Results from the combined eDNA and fyke net study indicated eDNA was detectable over an extended period, culminating approximately 8–13 days following peak spawning, suggesting developing smelt larvae might be the primary source of eDNA. Subsequently, smelt eDNA was readily detected in eDNA surveys of four streams, particularly following remediation of PCR inhibitors. Hierarchical occupancy modeling confirmed our surveys had high empirical detection for most sites, and that future surveys employing at least three sampling events, three samples per event, and six qPCR replicates can afford greater than 90% combined detection capability in low abundance systems. Conclusions These results demonstrate that relatively modest eDNA sampling effort has high capacity to detect this ephemerally present species of concern at low to moderate abundances. As such, smelt eDNA detection could improve range mapping by providing longer survey windows, safer sampling conditions, and lower field effort in low density systems, than afforded by existing visual and netting approaches. 
    more » « less
  3. This data set is a derived data set based on fish catch data. Data are collected annually to enable us to track the fish assemblages of eleven primary lakes (Allequash, Big Muskellunge, Crystal, Sparkling, Trout, bog lakes 27-02 [Crystal Bog] and 12-15 [Trout Bog], Mendota, Monona, Wingra and Fish). Sampling on Lakes Monona, Wingra, and Fish started in 1995; sampling on other lakes started in 1981. Sampling is done at six littoral zone sites per lake with seine, minnow or crayfish traps, and fyke nets; a boat-mounted electrofishing system samples three littoral transects. Vertically hung gill nets are used to obtain two pelagic samples per lake from the deepest point. A trammel net samples across the thermocline at two sites per lake. In the bog lakes only fyke nets and minnow traps are deployed. Parameters measured include species-level identification and lengths for all fish caught, and weight and scale samples from a subset. Derived data sets include species richness, catch per unit effort, and size distribution by species, lake, and year. Species richness for a lake is the number of fish species caught in that lake during the annual fish sampling. Hybrids captured are only included in the richness value if neither of the two hybridized species are caught in the lake that year. Fish identified only to genus or higher taxonomic level are not included if any fish identified to species within that genus or higher taxonomic level are caught. E.g., Unidentified Chub would be only included in the richness value if no other chub is caught in that lake that year. Sampling Frequency: annually. Number of sites: 11 Notes: Beach seining was discontinued after 2019. 2020 data does not exist due to insufficient sampling. In 2021, sampling in Fish Lake was suspended due to significant lake level changes. Data is missing for the two bogs in 2022. Please consult NTL's website for information on experimental lake manipulations and the DNR's website for management activities 
    more » « less
  4. Abstract

    Biodiversity is changing at an accelerating rate at both local and regional scales. Beta diversity, which quantifies species turnover between these two scales, is emerging as a key driver of ecosystem function that can inform spatial conservation. Yet measuring biodiversity remains a major challenge, especially in aquatic ecosystems. Decoding environmental DNA (eDNA) left behind by organisms offers the possibility of detecting species sans direct observation, a Rosetta Stone for biodiversity. While eDNA has proven useful to illuminate diversity in aquatic ecosystems, its utility for measuring beta diversity over spatial scales small enough to be relevant to conservation purposes is poorly known. Here we tested how eDNA performs relative to underwater visual census (UVC) to evaluate beta diversity of marine communities. We paired UVC with 12S eDNA metabarcoding and used a spatially structured hierarchical sampling design to assess key spatial metrics of fish communities on temperate rocky reefs in southern California. eDNA provided a more-detailed picture of the main sources of spatial variation in both taxonomic richness and community turnover, which primarily arose due to strong species filtering within and among rocky reefs. As expected, eDNA detected more taxa at the regional scale (69 vs. 38) which accumulated quickly with space and plateaued at only ~ 11 samples. Conversely, the discovery rate of new taxa was slower with no sign of saturation for UVC. Based on historical records in the region (2000–2018) we found that 6.9 times more UVC samples would be required to detect 50 taxa compared to eDNA. Our results show that eDNA metabarcoding can outperform diver counts to capture the spatial patterns in biodiversity at fine scales with less field effort and more power than traditional methods, supporting the notion that eDNA is a critical scientific tool for detecting biodiversity changes in aquatic ecosystems.

     
    more » « less
  5. Data are collected annually to enable us to track the fish assemblages of eleven primary lakes (Allequash, Big Muskellunge, Crystal, Sparkling, Trout, bog lakes 27-02 [Crystal Bog] and 12-15 [Trout Bog], Mendota, Monona, Wingra and Fish). Sampling on Lakes Monona, Wingra, and Fish started in 1995; sampling on other lakes started in 1981. Sampling is done at six littoral zone sites per lake with seine, minnow or crayfish traps, and fyke nets; a boat-mounted electrofishing system samples four littoral transects. Vertically hung gill nets are used to obtain two pelagic samples per lake from the deepest point. A trammel net samples across the thermocline at two sites per lake. In the bog lakes only fyke nets and minnow traps are deployed. Parameters measured include species-level identification and lengths for all fish caught, and weight and scale samples from a subset. Dominant species vary from lake to lake. Perch, rockbass, and bluegill are common, with walleye, large and smallmouth bass, northern pike and muskellunge as major piscivores. Cisco have been present in the pelagic waters of four lakes, and an exotic species, rainbow smelt, is present in two. The bog lakes contain mudminnows. Beach seining was discontinued after the 2019 season. The only sampling done in 2020 were a single gill-netting replicate in Sparkling, Crystal, and Trout lakes. Sampling in Fish Lake was missed in 2021 due to significant lake level changes. Data from the two bogs is missing in 2022. Sampling Frequency: annually Number of sites: 11. 
    more » « less