What is eDNA method standardisation and why do we need it?

Metabarcoding and Metagenomics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-13 DOI:10.3897/mbmg.9.132076
Susanna Theroux, Adam Sepulveda, Cathryn L Abbott, Zachary Gold, Alison W Watts, Margaret E Hunter, Katy E Klymus, Shana Lee Hirsch, Joseph M Craine, Devin N Jones, Rachel J Brown, Joshua A Steele, Miwa Takahashi, Rachel T Noble, John A Darling
{"title":"What is eDNA method standardisation and why do we need it?","authors":"Susanna Theroux, Adam Sepulveda, Cathryn L Abbott, Zachary Gold, Alison W Watts, Margaret E Hunter, Katy E Klymus, Shana Lee Hirsch, Joseph M Craine, Devin N Jones, Rachel J Brown, Joshua A Steele, Miwa Takahashi, Rachel T Noble, John A Darling","doi":"10.3897/mbmg.9.132076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rapid advancement of environmental DNA (eDNA) science in the past two decades has inspired a concomitant growth in the development of eDNA sampling and analytical methods. However, these methods are often developed by individual laboratories or institutions, which can isolate protocols within programmes, agencies or regions and prevent the beneficial exchange of data and ideas. Recent efforts to advance national and international coordination have resulted in a groundswell of standardisation efforts, but there is still considerable confusion around the role of formal standards for regulatory or research applications. With this commentary, we hope to provide clarity on the terminology used in standardisation discussions, including the differences between formal standards and best practice guidelines. Additionally, we discuss how eDNA method choice may be informed by environmental management scenarios and review examples of formal eDNA method standards being used to inform management action. The eDNA community now has an opportunity to develop a roadmap for method development to help close standardisation gaps, advance eDNA method adoption and accelerate our ability to monitor biological life at the scales our current environmental challenges demand.</p>","PeriodicalId":18374,"journal":{"name":"Metabarcoding and Metagenomics","volume":"9 ","pages":"e132076"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12180942/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metabarcoding and Metagenomics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/mbmg.9.132076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rapid advancement of environmental DNA (eDNA) science in the past two decades has inspired a concomitant growth in the development of eDNA sampling and analytical methods. However, these methods are often developed by individual laboratories or institutions, which can isolate protocols within programmes, agencies or regions and prevent the beneficial exchange of data and ideas. Recent efforts to advance national and international coordination have resulted in a groundswell of standardisation efforts, but there is still considerable confusion around the role of formal standards for regulatory or research applications. With this commentary, we hope to provide clarity on the terminology used in standardisation discussions, including the differences between formal standards and best practice guidelines. Additionally, we discuss how eDNA method choice may be informed by environmental management scenarios and review examples of formal eDNA method standards being used to inform management action. The eDNA community now has an opportunity to develop a roadmap for method development to help close standardisation gaps, advance eDNA method adoption and accelerate our ability to monitor biological life at the scales our current environmental challenges demand.

什么是eDNA方法标准化,我们为什么需要它?
在过去的二十年中,环境DNA (eDNA)科学的快速发展激发了eDNA采样和分析方法的发展。然而,这些方法往往是由个别实验室或机构开发的,这可能使方案、机构或区域内的规程孤立起来,并妨碍数据和思想的有益交流。最近推动国家和国际协调的努力导致了标准化努力的浪潮,但是关于正式标准在监管或研究应用中的作用仍然存在相当大的混乱。通过这篇评论,我们希望澄清标准化讨论中使用的术语,包括正式标准和最佳实践指南之间的差异。此外,我们还讨论了环境管理情景如何影响eDNA方法的选择,并回顾了用于通知管理行动的正式eDNA方法标准的示例。eDNA社区现在有机会为方法开发制定路线图,以帮助缩小标准化差距,推进eDNA方法的采用,并加快我们在当前环境挑战所需的规模上监测生物生命的能力。
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
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Animal Science and Zoology
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信