Summary1. Species detection using environmental DNA (eDNA) has tremendous potential for contributing to the understanding of the ecology and conservation of aquatic species. Detecting species using eDNA methods, rather than directly sampling the organisms, can reduce impacts on sensitive species and increase the power of field surveys for rare and elusive species. The sensitivity of eDNA methods, however, requires a heightened awareness and attention to quality assurance and quality control protocols. Additionally, the interpretation of eDNA data demands careful consideration of multiple factors. As eDNA methods have grown in application, diverse approaches have been implemented to address these issues. With interest in eDNA continuing to expand, supportive guidelines for undertaking eDNA studies are greatly needed. 2. Environmental DNA researchers from around the world have collaborated to produce this set of guidelines and considerations for implementing eDNA methods to detect aquatic macroorganisms. 3. Critical considerations for study design include preventing contamination in the field and the laboratory, choosing appropriate sample analysis methods, validating assays, testing for sample inhibition and following minimum reporting guidelines. Critical considerations for inference include temporal and spatial processes, limits of correlation of eDNA with abundance, uncertainty of positive and negative results, and potential sources of allochthonous DNA. 4. We present a synthesis of knowledge at this stage for application of this new and powerful detection method.

Environmental DNA (eDNA) from aquatic vertebrates has recently been used to estimate the presence of a species. We hypothesized that fish release DNA into the water at a rate commensurate with their biomass. Thus, the concentration of eDNA of a target species may be used to estimate the species biomass. We developed an eDNA method to estimate the biomass of common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.) using laboratory and field experiments. In the aquarium, the concentration of eDNA changed initially, but reached an equilibrium after 6 days. Temperature had no effect on eDNA concentrations in aquaria. The concentration of eDNA was positively correlated with carp biomass in both aquaria and experimental ponds. We used this method to estimate the biomass and distribution of carp in a natural freshwater lagoon. We demonstrated that the distribution of carp eDNA concentration was explained by water temperature. Our results suggest that biomass data estimated from eDNA concentration reflects the potential distribution of common carp in the natural environment. Measuring eDNA concentration offers a non-invasive, simple, and rapid method for estimating biomass. This method could inform management plans for the conservation of ecosystems.

Knowledge of the presence of an invasive species is critical to monitoring the sustainability of communities and ecosystems. Environmental DNA (eDNA), DNA fragments that are likely to be bound to organic matters in the water or in shed cells, has been used to monitor the presence of aquatic animals. Using an eDNA-based method, we estimated the presence of the invasive bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus, in 70 ponds located in seven locales on the Japanese mainland and on surrounding islands. We quantified the concentration of DNA copies in a 1 L water sample using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) with a primer/probe set. In addition, we visually observed the bluegill presence in the ponds from the shoreline. We detected bluegill eDNA in all the ponds where bluegills were observed visually and some where bluegills were not observed. Bluegills were also less prevalent on the islands than the mainland, likely owing to limited dispersal and introduction by humans. Our eDNA method simply and rapidly detects the presence of this invasive fish species with less disturbance to the environment during field surveys than traditional methods.

An environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis method has been recently developed to estimate the distribution of aquatic animals by quantifying the number of target DNA copies with quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). A new quantitative PCR technology, droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), partitions PCR reactions into thousands of droplets and detects the amplification in each droplet, thereby allowing direct quantification of target DNA. We evaluated the quantification accuracy of qPCR and ddPCR to estimate species abundance and biomass by using eDNA in mesocosm experiments involving different numbers of common carp. We found that ddPCR quantified the concentration of carp eDNA along with carp abundance and biomass more accurately than qPCR, especially at low eDNA concentrations. In addition, errors in the analysis were smaller in ddPCR than in qPCR. Thus, ddPCR is better suited to measure eDNA concentration in water, and it provides more accurate results for the abundance and biomass of the target species than qPCR. We also found that the relationship between carp abundance and eDNA concentration was stronger than that between biomass and eDNA by using both ddPCR and qPCR; this suggests that abundance can be better estimated by the analysis of eDNA for species with fewer variations in body mass.

Summary Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis for detecting the presence of aquatic and terrestrial organisms is an established method, and the eDNA concentration of a species can reflect its abundance/biomass at a site. However, attempts to estimate the abundance/biomass of aquatic species using eDNA concentrations in large stream and river ecosystems have received little attention. We determined the eDNA concentration and abundance/biomass of a stream fish, Plecoglossus altivelis, by conducting a snorkelling survey in the Saba River, Japan. Furthermore, we evaluated the relationship between eDNA concentrations and the estimated abundance/biomass of P. altivelis, and determined its spatial distribution within the river. Across the three seasons from spring to autumn, we found significant correlations between the eDNA concentration of P. altivelis and its abundance/biomass at study sites within the river. We detected the eDNA at the sites where we found only feeding traces on stones (where P. altivelis was not directly observed), but not at sites without feeding traces. Additionally, we tested the optimal number of qPCR replicates needed for the eDNA evaluation of P. altivelis abundance and biomass; only a small number of replicates was required when the eDNA concentration was high. Our findings suggest that eDNA analysis is a useful tool to estimate fish abundance/biomass as well as their spatial distribution in rivers.

The field of environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis has rapidly developed over the past decade and the technique has become widely used for detecting aquatic macroorganisms in a variety of habitats. However, a variety of measurement protocols have been individually developed for different eDNA studies and this may lead to confusion for others who wish to incorporate eDNA analysis in their research. It is important therefore to synthesize the current status of—and future challenges to—the methodology of eDNA analysis. We here synthesized the protocols from total 438 published eDNA studies detecting aquatic macroorganisms were used to calculate the frequency of using each method in eDNA analysis steps. We found that the frequency of methods used converged to one or two methods for any analysis step. Furthermore, although the procedure with highest frequency is not always the best, it was shown that the eDNA collection by filtration and subsequent extraction/purification using a DNeasy Blood and Tissue DNA extraction kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) or PowerWater DNA Extraction Kit (Qiagen) is the most common procedure. An understanding of the characteristics of commonly used methods can help those newly engaged in eDNA studies to understand the basic outline of eDNA analysis. Our review will be useful for the future improvement and development of analytical eDNA techniques of eDNA by sharing the recognition of methodological characteristic including advantages and disadvantages in major analytical techniques.

No abstract

Environmental DNA (eDNA) has been used to investigate species distributions in aquatic ecosystems. Most of these studies use real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to detect eDNA in water; however, PCR amplification is often inhibited by the presence of organic and inorganic matter. In droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), the sample is partitioned into thousands of nanoliter droplets, and PCR inhibition may be reduced by the detection of the end-point of PCR amplification in each droplet, independent of the amplification efficiency. In addition, real-time PCR reagents can affect PCR amplification and consequently alter detection rates. We compared the effectiveness of ddPCR and real-time PCR using two different PCR reagents for the detection of the eDNA from invasive bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus, in ponds. We found that ddPCR had higher detection rates of bluegill eDNA in pond water than real-time PCR with either of the PCR reagents, especially at low DNA concentrations. Limits of DNA detection, which were tested by spiking the bluegill DNA to DNA extracts from the ponds containing natural inhibitors, found that ddPCR had higher detection rate than real-time PCR. Our results suggest that ddPCR is more resistant to the presence of PCR inhibitors in field samples than real-time PCR. Thus, ddPCR outperforms real-time PCR methods for detecting eDNA to document species distributions in natural habitats, especially in habitats with high concentrations of PCR inhibitors.