Quantifying the Sensitivity of Targeted eDNA Surveys to Improve Detection of Invasive Cane Toads (Rhinella marina)

Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Ewen K. Lawler, Simon Clulow, Alejandro Trujillo-González, Paul G. Nevill, Richard P. Duncan
{"title":"Quantifying the Sensitivity of Targeted eDNA Surveys to Improve Detection of Invasive Cane Toads (Rhinella marina)","authors":"Ewen K. Lawler,&nbsp;Simon Clulow,&nbsp;Alejandro Trujillo-González,&nbsp;Paul G. Nevill,&nbsp;Richard P. Duncan","doi":"10.1002/edn3.70135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Environmental DNA (eDNA) surveys are increasingly used to monitor biodiversity because they are often more sensitive (have higher detection probability) than conventional monitoring methods. Sensitivity is a key consideration in designing monitoring programs because it determines the survey effort (e.g., number of samples per site) required to achieve a given likelihood of detecting a species. However, assessing the sensitivity of eDNA surveys and examining the factors influencing this in the field remain understudied. Here, we quantify the importance of key factors likely to influence eDNA sensitivity and compare the results of eDNA surveys to conventional visual surveys for detecting invasive cane toads (<i>Rhinella marina</i>) in northern Australia. We sampled waterbodies across the invasion front and showed that both eDNA and visual surveys had similar performance in detecting cane toads. Environmental DNA sensitivity varied predictably across waterbodies as a function of several factors. Sensitivity was higher: (1) when a greater volume of water was sampled at a water body; (2) at waterbodies with higher toad densities; (3) at smaller waterbodies; and (4) when cane toad tadpoles were present. We show how these findings can be used to tailor survey effort to ensure a specified level of detection probability at individual waterbodies, for example, by scaling the number of samples taken to water body size and tadpole presence/absence. Our study highlights the value of quantitatively assessing the sensitivity of eDNA surveys in the field and understanding the factors influencing sensitivity to achieve monitoring objectives.</p>","PeriodicalId":52828,"journal":{"name":"Environmental DNA","volume":"7 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/edn3.70135","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental DNA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/edn3.70135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Environmental DNA (eDNA) surveys are increasingly used to monitor biodiversity because they are often more sensitive (have higher detection probability) than conventional monitoring methods. Sensitivity is a key consideration in designing monitoring programs because it determines the survey effort (e.g., number of samples per site) required to achieve a given likelihood of detecting a species. However, assessing the sensitivity of eDNA surveys and examining the factors influencing this in the field remain understudied. Here, we quantify the importance of key factors likely to influence eDNA sensitivity and compare the results of eDNA surveys to conventional visual surveys for detecting invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) in northern Australia. We sampled waterbodies across the invasion front and showed that both eDNA and visual surveys had similar performance in detecting cane toads. Environmental DNA sensitivity varied predictably across waterbodies as a function of several factors. Sensitivity was higher: (1) when a greater volume of water was sampled at a water body; (2) at waterbodies with higher toad densities; (3) at smaller waterbodies; and (4) when cane toad tadpoles were present. We show how these findings can be used to tailor survey effort to ensure a specified level of detection probability at individual waterbodies, for example, by scaling the number of samples taken to water body size and tadpole presence/absence. Our study highlights the value of quantitatively assessing the sensitivity of eDNA surveys in the field and understanding the factors influencing sensitivity to achieve monitoring objectives.

量化eDNA靶向检测灵敏度提高蔗蟾蜍入侵检测水平
环境DNA (eDNA)调查越来越多地用于监测生物多样性,因为它们往往比传统的监测方法更敏感(具有更高的检测概率)。灵敏度是设计监测程序时的一个关键考虑因素,因为它决定了为达到检测某一物种的给定可能性所需的调查努力(例如,每个地点的样本数量)。然而,评估eDNA调查的敏感性和检查影响该领域的因素仍未得到充分研究。在这里,我们量化了可能影响eDNA敏感性的关键因素的重要性,并将eDNA调查结果与检测澳大利亚北部入侵甘蔗蟾蜍(Rhinella marina)的传统视觉调查结果进行了比较。我们对入侵前沿的水体进行了采样,结果表明eDNA和视觉调查在检测甘蔗蟾蜍方面具有相似的性能。环境DNA的敏感性在不同的水体中可预测地变化,作为几个因素的函数。灵敏度较高:(1)当水体的采样量较大时;(2)蟾蜍密度较高的水体;(3)较小的水体;(4)当蔗蟾蜍蝌蚪出现时。我们展示了这些发现如何用于定制调查工作,以确保在单个水体中达到特定水平的检测概率,例如,通过缩放水体大小和蝌蚪存在/不存在的样本数量。我们的研究强调了在野外定量评估eDNA调查的敏感性和了解影响敏感性的因素以实现监测目标的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental DNA
Environmental DNA Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信