Tracing the quagga mussel invasion along the Rhine river system using eDNA markers: early detection and surveillance of invasive zebra and quagga mussels

Abstract

Harbours are known introduction foci of marine alien species. They act as recipients of new introductions and as sources for regional spread. We report on subtidal surveys of fouling communities from 14 harbours along the coastline of South Africa that were used to identify predictors of high alien species numbers in support of prioritisation of monitoring actions by authorities. The harbours varied in nature from large, international shipping hubs to small, regional fishing harbours and recreational marinas. Fouling assemblages were assessed using visual and scrape sampling to ensure the detection of large, mobile and small inconspicuous species. In total, 29 alien species were recorded, 15 of which were detected outside of their previously known ranges. The number of species recorded per harbour varied from five to. Results revealed that high numbers of alien species were associated with the presence of yachts and low primary productivity. Harbours which had yachts and occurred in areas with mean Chl a minimum levels lower than 0.21 mg.m -3 had the highest number of alien species, while harbours without yachts that were larger than 0.1km 2 supported the fewest alien species. These findings suggest that the presence of yachts can be used to identify harbours with high numbers of alien species, particularly in regions with low productivity. While the applicability of these findings to other regions remains to be tested, this work suggests that harbours that fall within this category could be prioritised for monitoring of marine alien species.

Invasion genetics from eDNA and thousands of larvae: A targeted metabarcoding assay that distinguishes species and population variation of zebra and quagga mussels

“…A qPCR study of zebra mussel eDNA also found correspondence to benthic biomass of adults (Amberg, Merkes, Stott, Rees, & Erickson, ). As in the present study, eDNA surveys in the Rhine River using species‐specific quantitative (q)PCR assays matched the respective species proportions from field surveys (De Ventura et al, ). Their approach differed from ours as they required two different probes to differentiate between the species and were unable to evaluate haplotypic (intraspecific) variation.…”

“…Analysis of eDNA shed into water (via urine, waste, mucus, sloughed cells) has facilitated early detection of some AIS, but mostly has been limited to the detection of single species (Darling & Mahon, 2011;Ficetola, Miaud, Pompanon, & Taberlet, 2008;Jerde, Mahon, Chadderton, & Lodge, 2011). For example, eDNA was used to discover the quagga mussel in the Rhine River harbor of Basel, Switzerland, which had been missed by traditional monitoring (De Ventura, Kopp, Seppälä, & Jokela, 2017). Similarly, the zebra mussel was discerned from eDNA in the Red River off Lake Winnipeg, Canada, in 2014, a year before the first adult was located (Gingera, Bajno, Docker, & Reist, 2017).…”

Adding invasive species biosurveillance to the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage network

“…Fieldwork requires only the collection of water samples and thus lowers the effort and cost of species detection compared with traditional organismal surveys, such as netting, snorkeling, or electrofishing (Smart et al 2016, Wilcox et al 2016. Methods involving eDNA are gaining widespread use in monitoring and conservation applications (Cristescu and Hebert 2018), but questions remain about how to best implement regional, multi-watershed eDNA monitoring that is effective and efficient, especially for aquatic invasive species (e.g., Darling and Mahon 2011, De Ventura et al 2017, Gingera et al 2017. Methods involving eDNA are gaining widespread use in monitoring and conservation applications (Cristescu and Hebert 2018), but questions remain about how to best implement regional, multi-watershed eDNA monitoring that is effective and efficient, especially for aquatic invasive species (e.g., Darling and Mahon 2011, De Ventura et al 2017, Gingera et al 2017.…”

“…Even some of the first studies demonstrated the sensitivity of eDNA analysis for detection of rare and cryptic species, as well as providing crucial early detection for invasive species (Ficetola et al 2008, Goldberg et al 2011, Jerde et al 2011, Thomsen et al 2011. Methods involving eDNA are gaining widespread use in monitoring and conservation applications (Cristescu and Hebert 2018), but questions remain about how to best implement regional, multi-watershed eDNA monitoring that is effective and efficient, especially for aquatic invasive species (e.g., Darling and Mahon 2011, De Ventura et al 2017, Gingera et al 2017.…”

Heading south: new records of the invasive quagga musselDreissena rostriformis bugensis(Andrusov, 1897) in France and further perspectives

“…Data comes from environmental DNA (eDNA, Taberlet et al, 2012) samples, as already been used for detecting Dreissena species (Lance and Carr, 2012;De Ventura et al, 2017); direct observation during scuba-diving malacological surveys; and dredging of sediment. Water samples were analyzed by SpyGen ® for eDNA extraction, amplification and sequencing (for details on this unpublished protocol, see the methods developed by Valentini et al, 2016 for fishes and amphibians; and for freshwater bivalves, await Prié et al, in prep.).…”