Joshua B. Mouser, S. Brewer, M. Niemiller, Robert Mollenhauer, R. A. Van Den Bussche
{"title":"改进洞穴鱼类和洞穴小龙虾的采样方案,以解释环境变化","authors":"Joshua B. Mouser, S. Brewer, M. Niemiller, Robert Mollenhauer, R. A. Van Den Bussche","doi":"10.3897/SUBTBIOL.39.64279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Subterranean habitats represent focal habitats in many conservation strategies; however, these environments are some of the most difficult to sample. New sampling methods, such as environmental DNA (eDNA), show promise to improve stygobiont detection, but sources of sampling bias are poorly understood. Therefore, we determined the factors affecting detection probability using traditional visual surveys and eDNA surveys for both cavefishes and cave crayfishes and demonstrated how detection affects survey efforts for these taxa. We sampled 40 sites (179 visual and 183 eDNA surveys) across the Ozark Highlands ecoregion. We estimated the detection probability of cave crayfishes and cavefishes using both survey methods under varying environmental conditions. The effectiveness of eDNA or visual surveys varied by environmental conditions (i.e., water volume, prevailing substrate, and water velocity) and the target taxa. When sampling in areas with average water velocity, no flow, and coarse substrate, eDNA surveys had a higher detection probability (0.49) than visual surveys (0.35) for cavefishes and visual surveys (0.67) had a higher detection probability than eDNA surveys (0.40) for cave crayfishes. Under the same sampling conditions, 5 visual surveys compared to 10 eDNA surveys would be needed to confidently detect cave Subterranean Biology 39: 79–105 (2021) doi: 10.3897/subtbiol.39.64279 https://subtbiol.pensoft.net Copyright Joshua B. Mouser et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. RESEARCH ARTICLE Subterranean Biology Published by The International Society for Subterranean Biology A peer-reviewed open-access journal","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Refining sampling protocols for cavefishes and cave crayfishes to account for environmental variation\",\"authors\":\"Joshua B. Mouser, S. Brewer, M. Niemiller, Robert Mollenhauer, R. A. Van Den Bussche\",\"doi\":\"10.3897/SUBTBIOL.39.64279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Subterranean habitats represent focal habitats in many conservation strategies; however, these environments are some of the most difficult to sample. New sampling methods, such as environmental DNA (eDNA), show promise to improve stygobiont detection, but sources of sampling bias are poorly understood. Therefore, we determined the factors affecting detection probability using traditional visual surveys and eDNA surveys for both cavefishes and cave crayfishes and demonstrated how detection affects survey efforts for these taxa. We sampled 40 sites (179 visual and 183 eDNA surveys) across the Ozark Highlands ecoregion. We estimated the detection probability of cave crayfishes and cavefishes using both survey methods under varying environmental conditions. The effectiveness of eDNA or visual surveys varied by environmental conditions (i.e., water volume, prevailing substrate, and water velocity) and the target taxa. When sampling in areas with average water velocity, no flow, and coarse substrate, eDNA surveys had a higher detection probability (0.49) than visual surveys (0.35) for cavefishes and visual surveys (0.67) had a higher detection probability than eDNA surveys (0.40) for cave crayfishes. Under the same sampling conditions, 5 visual surveys compared to 10 eDNA surveys would be needed to confidently detect cave Subterranean Biology 39: 79–105 (2021) doi: 10.3897/subtbiol.39.64279 https://subtbiol.pensoft.net Copyright Joshua B. Mouser et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. RESEARCH ARTICLE Subterranean Biology Published by The International Society for Subterranean Biology A peer-reviewed open-access journal\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3897/SUBTBIOL.39.64279\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/SUBTBIOL.39.64279","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
摘要
地下栖息地是许多保护战略中的重点栖息地;然而,这些环境是最难采样的。新的采样方法,如环境DNA(eDNA),有望改善苯乙烯的检测,但对采样偏差的来源知之甚少。因此,我们使用传统的视觉调查和洞穴鱼类和洞穴小龙虾的eDNA调查确定了影响检测概率的因素,并证明了检测如何影响这些分类群的调查工作。我们对奥扎克高地生态区的40个地点进行了抽样调查(179次视觉调查和183次eDNA调查)。我们估计了在不同环境条件下,使用这两种调查方法检测洞穴小龙虾和洞穴鱼类的概率。eDNA或视觉调查的有效性因环境条件(即水量、主要基质和水流速度)和目标分类群而异。当在平均水流速度、无流量和基质粗糙的地区取样时,洞穴鱼类的eDNA调查的检测概率(0.49)高于视觉调查(0.35),洞穴小龙虾的视觉调查(0.67)的检测概率高于eDNA调查(0.40)。在相同的采样条件下,需要5次视觉调查,而不是10次eDNA调查,才能自信地检测洞穴地下生物学39:79-105(2021)doi:10.3897/subtbiol.3964279https://subtbiol.pensoft.net版权所有Joshua B.Mouser等人。这是一篇根据知识共享署名许可证(CC BY 4.0)条款分发的开放获取文章,该许可证允许在任何媒体上不受限制地使用、分发和复制,前提是原始作者和来源可信。研究文章地下生物学由国际地下生物学学会出版同行评审的开放获取期刊
Refining sampling protocols for cavefishes and cave crayfishes to account for environmental variation
Subterranean habitats represent focal habitats in many conservation strategies; however, these environments are some of the most difficult to sample. New sampling methods, such as environmental DNA (eDNA), show promise to improve stygobiont detection, but sources of sampling bias are poorly understood. Therefore, we determined the factors affecting detection probability using traditional visual surveys and eDNA surveys for both cavefishes and cave crayfishes and demonstrated how detection affects survey efforts for these taxa. We sampled 40 sites (179 visual and 183 eDNA surveys) across the Ozark Highlands ecoregion. We estimated the detection probability of cave crayfishes and cavefishes using both survey methods under varying environmental conditions. The effectiveness of eDNA or visual surveys varied by environmental conditions (i.e., water volume, prevailing substrate, and water velocity) and the target taxa. When sampling in areas with average water velocity, no flow, and coarse substrate, eDNA surveys had a higher detection probability (0.49) than visual surveys (0.35) for cavefishes and visual surveys (0.67) had a higher detection probability than eDNA surveys (0.40) for cave crayfishes. Under the same sampling conditions, 5 visual surveys compared to 10 eDNA surveys would be needed to confidently detect cave Subterranean Biology 39: 79–105 (2021) doi: 10.3897/subtbiol.39.64279 https://subtbiol.pensoft.net Copyright Joshua B. Mouser et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. RESEARCH ARTICLE Subterranean Biology Published by The International Society for Subterranean Biology A peer-reviewed open-access journal
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.