Applications of environmental DNA (eDNA) in ecology and conservation: opportunities, challenges and prospects
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] Xin Zhou,et al. Filling reference gaps via assembling DNA barcodes using high-throughput sequencing—moving toward barcoding the world , 2017, GigaScience.
[2] J. Sarrazin,et al. Exploring Environmental DNA (eDNA) to Assess Biodiversity of Hard Substratum Faunal Communities on the Lucky Strike Vent Field (Mid-Atlantic Ridge) and Investigate Recolonization Dynamics After an Induced Disturbance , 2020, Frontiers in Marine Science.
[3] Douglas W. Yu,et al. Measuring protected-area outcomes with leech iDNA: large-scale quantification of vertebrate biodiversity in Ailaoshan reserve , 2020, bioRxiv.
[4] Pierre Taberlet,et al. Improved detection of an alien invasive species through environmental DNA barcoding: the example of the American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus , 2012 .
[5] Wayne G Landis,et al. Using Bayesian networks to predict risk to estuary water quality and patterns of benthic environmental DNA in Queensland , 2018, Integrated environmental assessment and management.
[6] J. B. Schmidt,et al. Arthropod Diversity in a Tropical Forest , 2012, Science.
[7] R. Watson,et al. Purification and characterization of a common soil component which inhibits the polymerase chain reaction. , 2000, Canadian journal of microbiology.
[8] Douglas W. Yu,et al. SPIKEPIPE: A metagenomic pipeline for the accurate quantification of eukaryotic species occurrences and abundances using DNA barcodes or mitogenomes , 2019, bioRxiv.
[9] Qing Yang,et al. Ultra-deep sequencing enables high-fidelity recovery of biodiversity for bulk arthropod samples without PCR amplification , 2013, GigaScience.
[10] E. E. Sigsgaard,et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding of wild flowers reveals diverse communities of terrestrial arthropods , 2019, Ecology and evolution.
[11] Jianfu Zhao,et al. Using environmental DNA to assess population‐wide spatiotemporal reserve use , 2017, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.
[12] A. Ardura. Species-specific markers for early detection of marine invertebrate invaders through eDNA methods: Gaps and priorities in GenBank as database example , 2019, Journal for Nature Conservation.
[13] Jonathan P. Rose,et al. Traditional trapping methods outperform eDNA sampling for introduced semi-aquatic snakes , 2019, PloS one.
[14] H. Doi,et al. Detection of freshwater mussels (Sinanodonta spp.) in artificial ponds through environmental DNA: a comparison with traditional hand collection methods , 2019, Limnology.
[15] P. Taberlet,et al. Species detection using environmental DNA from water samples , 2008, Biology Letters.
[16] F. Rimet,et al. Diatom metabarcoding applied to large scale monitoring networks: Optimization of bioinformatics strategies using Mothur software , 2020 .
[17] Vanessa A. Mata,et al. How much is enough? Effects of technical and biological replication on metabarcoding dietary analysis , 2018, Molecular ecology.
[18] B. Nielsen,et al. Chloroplast DNA Copy Number Changes during Plant Development in Organelle DNA Polymerase Mutants , 2016, Front. Plant Sci..
[19] S. Mariani,et al. Space-time dynamics in monitoring neotropical fish communities using eDNA metabarcoding , 2020, bioRxiv.
[20] K. Stewart. Understanding the effects of biotic and abiotic factors on sources of aquatic environmental DNA , 2019, Biodiversity and Conservation.
[21] T. Lindahl. Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA , 1993, Nature.
[22] Lauren M. Sassoubre,et al. Quantification of Environmental DNA (eDNA) Shedding and Decay Rates for Three Marine Fish. , 2016, Environmental science & technology.
[23] Brent C. Knights,et al. Development of a quantitative PCR method for screening ichthyoplankton samples for bigheaded carps , 2018, Biological Invasions.
[24] E. Lara,et al. Environmental filtering and phylogenetic clustering correlate with the distribution patterns of cryptic protist species. , 2018, Ecology.
[25] G. Singer,et al. Comprehensive biodiversity analysis via ultra-deep patterned flow cell technology: a case study of eDNA metabarcoding seawater , 2019, Scientific Reports.
[26] Kelly D. Goodwin,et al. In situ Autonomous Acquisition and Preservation of Marine Environmental DNA Using an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle , 2019, Front. Mar. Sci..
[27] Yiyuan Li,et al. Fish community assessment with eDNA metabarcoding: effects of sampling design and bioinformatic filtering , 2017 .
[28] Peter Rådström,et al. Strategies to Generate PCR-Compatible Samples , 2004 .
[29] C. Goldberg,et al. eDNA Sampler: A fully integrated environmental DNA sampling system , 2018 .
[30] C. Wilson,et al. Recognizing false positives: synthetic oligonucleotide controls for environmental DNA surveillance , 2016 .
[31] M. Galan,et al. Next-Generation Sequencing for Rodent Barcoding: Species Identification from Fresh, Degraded and Environmental Samples , 2012, PloS one.
[32] Douglas W. Yu,et al. Large-scale Quantification of Vertebrate Biodiversity in Ailaoshan Nature Reserve from Leech iDNA , 2020 .
[33] R. Dorazio,et al. Environmental DNA sampling reveals high occupancy rates of invasive Burmese pythons at wading bird breeding aggregations in the central Everglades , 2019, PloS one.
[34] Robert S. Arkle,et al. Estimating occupancy and abundance of stream amphibians using environmental DNA from filtered water samples , 2013 .
[35] T. Nguyen,et al. Monitoring a loss: Detection of the semi‐aquatic crocodile lizard ( Shinisaurus crocodilurus ) in inaccessible habitats via environmental DNA , 2019, Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.
[36] C. Helbing,et al. Expansion of the known distribution of the coastal tailed frog, Ascaphus truei, in British Columbia, Canada, using robust eDNA detection methods , 2019, PloS one.
[37] T. Minamoto,et al. A basin‐scale application of environmental DNA assessment for rare endemic species and closely related exotic species in rivers: a case study of giant salamanders in Japan , 2015 .
[38] J. Vörös,et al. Surveying Europe’s Only Cave-Dwelling Chordate Species (Proteus anguinus) Using Environmental DNA , 2017, PloS one.
[39] Karen E. Chambers,et al. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis of DNA from noninvasive samples for accurate microsatellite genotyping of wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) , 2001, Molecular ecology.
[40] M. A. Senar,et al. The choice of universal primers and the characteristics of the species mixture determine when DNA metabarcoding can be quantitative , 2018, Molecular ecology.
[41] D. Lodge,et al. Estimating species richness using environmental DNA , 2016, Ecology and evolution.
[42] K. Balasingham,et al. Residual eDNA detection sensitivity assessed by quantitative real‐time PCR in a river ecosystem , 2017, Molecular ecology resources.
[43] Miki Baba,et al. A simple method for preserving environmental DNA in water samples at ambient temperature by addition of cationic surfactant , 2017, Limnology.
[44] C. K. Dodd,et al. Tracking Global Population Trends: Population Time-Series Data and a Living Planet Index for Reptiles , 2018, Journal of Herpetology.
[45] Paul Nichols,et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding of lake fish communities reflects long‐term data from established survey methods , 2016, Molecular ecology.
[46] P. Anastácio,et al. Detection and Control of Invasive Freshwater Crayfish: From Traditional to Innovative Methods , 2019, Diversity.
[47] Elizabeth A. Casman,et al. Making sense of the noise: The effect of hydrology on silver carp eDNA detection in the Chicago area waterway system. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.
[48] Z. Buřivalová,et al. The sound of a tropical forest , 2019, Science.
[49] Vanessa A. Mata,et al. Female dietary bias towards large migratory moths in the European free-tailed bat (Tadarida teniotis) , 2016, Biology Letters.
[50] D. Lodge,et al. The room temperature preservation of filtered environmental DNA samples and assimilation into a phenol–chloroform–isoamyl alcohol DNA extraction , 2014, Molecular ecology resources.
[51] V. Chanudet,et al. Direct fishing and eDNA metabarcoding for biomonitoring during a 3-year survey significantly improves number of fish detected around a South East Asian reservoir , 2018, PloS one.
[52] O. Diserud,et al. Environmental DNA filtration techniques affect recovered biodiversity , 2018, Scientific Reports.
[53] H. Madsen,et al. Environmental DNA for improved detection and environmental surveillance of schistosomiasis , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[54] T. Rognes,et al. Swarm v2: highly-scalable and high-resolution amplicon clustering , 2015, PeerJ.
[55] S. Rogers,et al. Predicting the fate of eDNA in the environment and implications for studying biodiversity , 2019, Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
[56] M. Kondoh,et al. The Release Rate of Environmental DNA from Juvenile and Adult Fish , 2014, PloS one.
[57] M. Renshaw,et al. Environmental DNA (eDNA) Detection Probability Is Influenced by Seasonal Activity of Organisms , 2016, PloS one.
[58] P. Taberlet,et al. Environmental DNA , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[59] W. L. Chadderton,et al. Validation of eDNA Surveillance Sensitivity for Detection of Asian Carps in Controlled and Field Experiments , 2013, PloS one.
[60] C. Turner,et al. Fish environmental DNA is more concentrated in aquatic sediments than surface water , 2015 .
[61] T. Kono,et al. Using environmental DNA analyses to assess the occurrence and abundance of the endangered amphidromous fish Plecoglossus altivelis ryukyuensis , 2020, Biodiversity data journal.
[62] E. Petit,et al. The downside of eDNA as a survey tool in water bodies , 2015 .
[63] Gregory D. Williams,et al. Spatial distribution of environmental DNA in a nearshore marine habitat , 2017, PeerJ.
[64] M. Vences,et al. Detection of elusive fire salamander larvae (Salamandra salamandra) in streams via environmental DNA , 2019, Amphibia-Reptilia.
[65] C. Wilson,et al. Stimulation and suppression of PCR-mediated recombination. , 1998, Nucleic acids research.
[66] W. L. Chadderton,et al. Detection of Asian carp DNA as part of a Great Lakes basin-wide surveillance program , 2013 .
[67] C. Schrader,et al. PCR inhibitors – occurrence, properties and removal , 2012, Journal of applied microbiology.
[68] J. P. Collins,et al. Site occupancy models in the analysis of environmental DNA presence/absence surveys: a case study of an emerging amphibian pathogen , 2013 .
[69] J. Walsh,et al. Using eDNA, sediment subfossils, and zooplankton nets to detect invasive spiny water flea (Bythotrephes longimanus) , 2018, Biological Invasions.
[70] T. Cordier,et al. Multi-marker eDNA metabarcoding survey to assess the environmental impact of three offshore gas platforms in the North Adriatic Sea (Italy). , 2019, Marine environmental research.
[71] Z. Kawabata,et al. Surveillance of fish species composition using environmental DNA , 2012, Limnology.
[72] Adam J. Sepulveda,et al. Environmental DNA as a new method for early detection of New Zealand mudsnails (Potamopyrgus antipodarum) , 2013, Freshwater Science.
[73] D. A. Fernández,et al. The expansion of exotic Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in the extreme south of Patagonia: an environmental DNA approach , 2019, Biological Invasions.
[74] A. Maruyama,et al. Environmental DNA analysis as a non‐invasive quantitative tool for reproductive migration of a threatened endemic fish in rivers , 2018, Ecology and evolution.
[75] B. Deagle,et al. Analysis of Australian fur seal diet by pyrosequencing prey DNA in faeces , 2009, Molecular ecology.
[76] Jim Foster,et al. Using eDNA to develop a national citizen science-based monitoring programme for the great crested newt (Triturus cristatus) , 2015 .
[77] S. Henkel,et al. Assessing differences in macrofaunal assemblages as a factor of sieve mesh size, distance between samples, and time of sampling , 2017, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.
[78] Anthony M. Zador,et al. Sources of PCR-induced distortions in high-throughput sequencing data sets , 2014, bioRxiv.
[79] Frédéric Mahé,et al. Swarm: robust and fast clustering method for amplicon-based studies , 2014, PeerJ.
[80] J. T. Dunnen,et al. Efficient and sensitive identification and quantification of airborne pollen using next‐generation DNA sequencing , 2015, Molecular ecology resources.
[81] Meixi Lin,et al. Effective detection of environmental DNA from the invasive American bullfrog , 2019, Biological Invasions.
[82] Adam J. Sepulveda,et al. Understanding environmental DNA detection probabilities: A case study using a stream-dwelling char Salvelinus fontinalis , 2015 .
[83] T. Bruns,et al. Quantifying microbial communities with 454 pyrosequencing: does read abundance count? , 2010, Molecular ecology.
[84] Michael J. Miller,et al. Release of eDNA by different life history stages and during spawning activities of laboratory-reared Japanese eels for interpretation of oceanic survey data , 2019, Scientific Reports.
[85] Gareth Jones,et al. Taxon‐specific PCR for DNA barcoding arthropod prey in bat faeces , 2011, Molecular ecology resources.
[86] Charles K. Lee,et al. Evidence of plant and animal communities at exposed and subglacial (cave) geothermal sites in Antarctica , 2018, Polar Biology.
[87] P. Taberlet,et al. Spatial Representativeness of Environmental DNA Metabarcoding Signal for Fish Biodiversity Assessment in a Natural Freshwater System , 2016, PloS one.
[88] C. Goldberg,et al. A self‐preserving, partially biodegradable eDNA filter , 2019, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.
[89] K. Halanych,et al. Meiofaunal community analysis by high-throughput sequencing: comparison of extraction, quality filtering, and clustering methods. , 2015, Marine genomics.
[90] Lynsey R. Harper,et al. Needle in a haystack? A comparison of eDNA metabarcoding and targeted qPCR for detection of the great crested newt (Triturus cristatus) , 2018, Ecology and evolution.
[91] David A. Strand,et al. Detection of an invasive aquatic plant in natural water bodies using environmental DNA , 2019, PloS one.
[92] H. Spencer,et al. Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding reveals strong discrimination among diverse marine habitats connected by water movement , 2019, Molecular ecology resources.
[93] F. Altermatt,et al. Transport Distance of Invertebrate Environmental DNA in a Natural River , 2014, PloS one.
[94] Thierry Grange,et al. An Efficient Multistrategy DNA Decontamination Procedure of PCR Reagents for Hypersensitive PCR Applications , 2010, PloS one.
[95] M. Kelly-Quinn,et al. Identifying spawning sites and other critical habitat in lotic systems using eDNA “snapshots”: A case study using the sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus L. , 2018, Ecology and evolution.
[96] P. Anders,et al. Utilizing environmental DNA for fish eradication effectiveness monitoring in streams , 2019, Biological Invasions.
[97] A M Prince,et al. PCR: how to kill unwanted DNA. , 1992, BioTechniques.
[98] R. Swihart,et al. The importance of including imperfect detection models in eDNA experimental design , 2016, Molecular ecology resources.
[99] Eske Willerslev,et al. Environmental DNA - An emerging tool in conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity , 2015 .
[100] B. Baldigo,et al. Efficacy of Environmental DNA to Detect and Quantify Brook Trout Populations in Headwater Streams of the Adirondack Mountains, New York , 2017 .
[101] Environmental DNA (eDNA) detects the pool frog (Pelophylax lessonae) at times when traditional monitoring methods are insensitive , 2018, Scientific Reports.
[102] H. Timmers,et al. Regulation of anti-sense transcription by Mot1p and NC2 via removal of TATA-binding protein (TBP) from the 3′-end of genes , 2014, Nucleic acids research.
[103] François Fabianek,et al. The diet of Myotis lucifugus across Canada: assessing foraging quality and diet variability , 2014, Molecular ecology.
[104] D. Chapman,et al. Quantification of eDNA shedding rates from invasive bighead carp Hypophthalmichthys nobilis and silver carp Hypophthalmichthys molitrix. , 2015 .
[105] Christopher A. Taylor,et al. Environmental DNA detects a rare large river crayfish but with little relation to local abundance , 2018 .
[106] T. Caro,et al. Sensitivity of Africa’s larger mammals to humans , 2018, Journal for Nature Conservation.
[107] Jesse A. Port,et al. Indexed PCR Primers Induce Template-Specific Bias in Large-Scale DNA Sequencing Studies , 2016, PloS one.
[108] F. Nakajima,et al. Effects of treated sample weight and DNA marker length on sediment eDNA based detection of a benthic invertebrate , 2018, Ecological Indicators.
[109] E. Nielsen,et al. Species-specific detection and quantification of environmental DNA from marine fishes in the Baltic Sea , 2019, Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology.
[110] G. McCracken,et al. Disparities in second‐generation DNA metabarcoding results exposed with accessible and repeatable workflows , 2018, Molecular ecology resources.
[111] Douglas W. Yu,et al. Environmental DNA for the enumeration and management of Pacific salmon , 2018, bioRxiv.
[112] Erin K. Grey,et al. eDNA metabarcoding as a new surveillance approach for coastal Arctic biodiversity , 2018, Ecology and evolution.
[113] N. Isaac,et al. Complex long-term biodiversity change among invertebrates, bryophytes and lichens , 2020, Nature Ecology & Evolution.
[114] Michael J. Miller,et al. Oceanic spawning ecology of freshwater eels in the western North Pacific , 2011, Nature communications.
[115] H. Possingham,et al. Prioritization of Marine Turtle Management Projects: A Protocol that Accounts for Threats to Different Life History Stages , 2017 .
[116] O. Evrard,et al. Environmental DNA provides information on sediment sources: A study in catchments affected by Fukushima radioactive fallout. , 2019, The Science of the total environment.
[117] Kristy Deiner,et al. Special Issue Article: Environmental DNA Choice of capture and extraction methods affect detection of freshwater biodiversity from environmental DNA , 2015 .
[118] B. Letcher,et al. Distance, flow and PCR inhibition: eDNA dynamics in two headwater streams , 2015, Molecular ecology resources.
[119] A. Coulter,et al. Detecting the movement and spawning activity of bigheaded carps with environmental DNA , 2016, Molecular ecology resources.
[120] G. Lamberti,et al. Comparative Cost and Effort of Fish Distribution Detection via Environmental DNA Analysis and Electrofishing , 2017 .
[121] A. Piaggio,et al. No filters, no fridges: a method for preservation of water samples for eDNA analysis , 2016, BMC Research Notes.
[122] G. Inglis,et al. Considerations for incorporating real-time PCR assays into routine marine biosecurity surveillance programmes: a case study targeting the Mediterranean fanworm (Sabella spallanzanii) and club tunicate (Styela clava) 1. , 2019, Genome.
[123] K. Tsukamoto,et al. First use of oceanic environmental DNA to study the spawning ecology of the Japanese eel Anguilla japonica , 2019, Marine Ecology Progress Series.
[124] J. Trevors,et al. Cycling of extracellular DNA in the soil environment , 2007 .
[125] W. L. Chadderton,et al. Environmental conditions influence eDNA persistence in aquatic systems. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.
[126] A. Piaggio,et al. Detecting an elusive invasive species: a diagnostic PCR to detect Burmese python in Florida waters and an assessment of persistence of environmental DNA , 2014, Molecular ecology resources.
[127] L. Bernatchez,et al. Estimating fish abundance and biomass from eDNA concentrations: variability among capture methods and environmental conditions , 2016, Molecular ecology resources.
[128] Paul D. Jones,et al. Determining Presence of Rare Amphibian Species: Testing and Combining Novel Survey Methods , 2019, Journal of Herpetology.
[129] Lauren M. Sassoubre,et al. Environmental DNA (eDNA) Shedding and Decay Rates to Model Freshwater Mussel eDNA Transport in a River. , 2017, Environmental science & technology.
[130] B. Kemp,et al. Use of bleach to eliminate contaminating DNA from the surface of bones and teeth. , 2005, Forensic science international.
[131] D. Lodge,et al. Particle size distribution and optimal capture of aqueous macrobial eDNA , 2014, bioRxiv.
[132] Panu Somervuo,et al. Animal Sound Identifier (ASI): software for automated identification of vocal animals. , 2018, Ecology letters.
[133] Rangewide tidewater goby occupancy survey using environmental DNA , 2019, Conservation Genetics.
[134] Z. Kawabata,et al. Estimation of Fish Biomass Using Environmental DNA , 2012, PloS one.
[135] Aldenor G. Santos,et al. Occurrence of the potent mutagens 2- nitrobenzanthrone and 3-nitrobenzanthrone in fine airborne particles , 2019, Scientific Reports.
[136] José J Lahoz-Monfort,et al. Statistical approaches to account for false‐positive errors in environmental DNA samples , 2016, Molecular ecology resources.
[137] M. Stoeckle,et al. Aquatic environmental DNA detects seasonal fish abundance and habitat preference in an urban estuary , 2017, PloS one.
[138] Emanuel A. Fronhofer,et al. Environmental DNA reveals that rivers are conveyer belts of biodiversity information , 2016, Nature Communications.
[139] Pierre Taberlet,et al. How to limit false positives in environmental DNA and metabarcoding? , 2016, Molecular ecology resources.
[140] J. Maldonado,et al. Concurrent visual encounter sampling validates eDNA selectivity and sensitivity for the endangered wood turtle (Glyptemys insculpta) , 2019, PloS one.
[141] Dawn B. Goldsmith,et al. Evaluation of Filtration and DNA Extraction Methods for Environmental DNA Biodiversity Assessments across Multiple Trophic Levels , 2017, Front. Mar. Sci..
[142] A. Clarke,et al. Why does metabolism scale with temperature , 2004 .
[143] J. Amberg,et al. Environmental DNA as a tool to help inform zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, management in inland lakes , 2019, Management of Biological Invasions.
[144] V. Fonseca. “Pitfalls in relative abundance estimation using eDNA metabarcoding” , 2018, Molecular Ecology Resources.
[145] D. Sims,et al. Persistence of environmental DNA in marine systems , 2018, Communications Biology.
[146] P. Välimäki,et al. From feces to data: A metabarcoding method for analyzing consumed and available prey in a bird‐insect food web , 2018, Ecology and evolution.
[147] D. Serre,et al. In silico assessment of primers for eDNA studies using PrimerTree and application to characterize the biodiversity surrounding the Cuyahoga River , 2016, Scientific Reports.
[148] D. Sims,et al. Non‐specific amplification compromises environmental DNA metabarcoding with COI , 2019, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.
[149] Antton Alberdi,et al. Scrutinizing key steps for reliable metabarcoding of environmental samples , 2018 .
[150] Kristian Meissner,et al. Implementation options for DNA-based identification into ecological status assessment under the European Water Framework Directive. , 2018, Water research.
[151] M. Miya,et al. Evaluation of detection probabilities at the water-filtering and initial PCR steps in environmental DNA metabarcoding using a multispecies site occupancy model , 2019, Scientific Reports.
[152] Eske Willerslev,et al. Detection of a Diverse Marine Fish Fauna Using Environmental DNA from Seawater Samples , 2012, PloS one.
[153] François Pompanon,et al. Persistence of Environmental DNA in Freshwater Ecosystems , 2011, PloS one.
[154] P. Taberlet,et al. Who is eating what: diet assessment using next generation sequencing , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[155] G. Ficetola,et al. Conditionally autoregressive models improve occupancy analyses of autocorrelated data: An example with environmental DNA , 2018, Molecular ecology resources.
[156] Correction: The Release Rate of Environmental DNA from Juvenile and Adult Fish , 2015, PLoS ONE.
[157] Jianfu Zhao,et al. Characterization, optimization, and validation of environmental DNA (eDNA) markers to detect an endangered aquatic mammal , 2016, Conservation Genetics Resources.
[158] A. Piaggio,et al. Molecular forensics in avian conservation: a DNA-based approach for identifying mammalian predators of ground-nesting birds and eggs , 2016, BMC Research Notes.
[159] C. Gratton,et al. An improved method for utilizing high‐throughput amplicon sequencing to determine the diets of insectivorous animals , 2019, Molecular ecology resources.
[160] C. Greene,et al. Environmental DNA provides quantitative estimates of a threatened salmon species , 2019, Biological Conservation.
[161] P. Taberlet,et al. Environmental DNA and metabarcoding for the study of amphibians and reptiles: species distribution, the microbiome, and much more , 2019, Amphibia-Reptilia.
[162] J. Secondi,et al. Assessing the effect of landscape features on pond colonisation by an elusive amphibian invader using environmental DNA , 2020 .
[163] Satsuki Tsuji,et al. Environmental DNA reveals nonmigratory individuals of Palaemon paucidens overwintering in Lake Biwa shallow waters , 2018, Freshwater Science.
[164] R. Meier,et al. Next-generation freshwater bioassessment: eDNA metabarcoding with a conserved metazoan primer reveals species-rich and reservoir-specific communities , 2016, Royal Society Open Science.
[165] H. Hollert,et al. Assessing the fate of brown trout (Salmo trutta) environmental DNA in a natural stream using a sensitive and specific dual-labelled probe. , 2019, The Science of the total environment.
[166] P. Taberlet,et al. Metabarcoding of modern soil DNA gives a highly local vegetation signal in Svalbard tundra , 2018, The Holocene.
[167] Robert S. Arkle,et al. Molecular Detection of Vertebrates in Stream Water: A Demonstration Using Rocky Mountain Tailed Frogs and Idaho Giant Salamanders , 2011, PloS one.
[168] C. Goldberg,et al. Characterizing the distribution of an endangered salmonid using environmental DNA analysis , 2015 .
[169] H. Doi,et al. Nuclear internal transcribed spacer‐1 as a sensitive genetic marker for environmental DNA studies in common carp Cyprinus carpio , 2017, Molecular ecology resources.
[170] Louis A. Tremblay,et al. Metabarcoding monitoring analysis: the pros and cons of using co-extracted environmental DNA and RNA data to assess offshore oil production impacts on benthic communities , 2017, PeerJ.
[171] C. Goldberg,et al. Quantifying effects of UV-B, temperature, and pH on eDNA degradation in aquatic microcosms , 2015 .
[172] Xiaowei Zhang,et al. eDNA metabarcoding in zooplankton improves the ecological status assessment of aquatic ecosystems. , 2019, Environment international.
[173] Chanjuan Qu,et al. Evaluating monitoring options for conservation: comparing traditional and environmental DNA tools for a critically endangered mammal , 2019, The Science of Nature.
[174] D. Gleeson,et al. Environmental DNA monitoring and management of invasive fish: comparison of eDNA and fyke netting , 2017 .
[175] Jeffrey A. Falke,et al. A Rapid‐Assessment Method to Estimate the Distribution of Juvenile Chinook Salmon in Tributary Habitats Using eDNA and Occupancy Estimation , 2018 .
[176] Jindong Zhao,et al. Assessment of fish communities using environmental DNA: Effect of spatial sampling design in lentic systems of different sizes , 2020, Molecular ecology resources.
[177] K. Athira,et al. Rapid assessment of biodiversity using acoustic indices , 2018, Biodiversity and Conservation.
[178] Reid Tingley,et al. Optimal survey designs for environmental DNA sampling , 2017 .
[179] James Roberts,et al. Utility of eDNA and occupancy models for monitoring an endangered fish across diverse riverine habitats , 2018, Hydrobiologia.
[180] Shaun P. Wilkinson,et al. Development of a multi-assay approach for monitoring coral diversity using eDNA metabarcoding , 2019, Coral Reefs.
[181] Z. Olson,et al. An eDNA approach to detect eastern hellbenders (Cryptobranchus a. alleganiensis) using samples of water , 2012, Wildlife Research.
[182] M. Seymour. Rapid progression and future of environmental DNA research , 2019, Communications Biology.
[183] R. Corlett. A Bigger Toolbox: Biotechnology in Biodiversity Conservation. , 2017, Trends in biotechnology.
[184] U. Srinivasan. Morphological and Behavioral Correlates of Long-Term Bird Survival in Selectively Logged Forest , 2019, Front. Ecol. Evol..
[185] Mark A. Davis,et al. Radiotelemetry reveals effects of upstream biomass and UV exposure on environmental DNA occupancy and detection for a large freshwater turtle , 2019, Environmental DNA.
[186] C. Hardy,et al. Does Size Matter? An Experimental Evaluation of the Relative Abundance and Decay Rates of Aquatic Environmental DNA. , 2018, Environmental science & technology.
[187] Katherine Hubbard,et al. Assessing eukaryotic biodiversity in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary through environmental DNA metabarcoding , 2019, Ecology and evolution.
[188] Hirotoshi Sato,et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding for fish community analysis in backwater lakes: A comparison of capture methods , 2019, PloS one.
[189] Thomas W. A. Braukmann,et al. Finding the pond through the weeds: eDNA reveals underestimated diversity of pondweeds , 2018, Applications in plant sciences.
[190] J. Gómez‐Zurita,et al. High-throughput biodiversity analysis: Rapid assessment of species richness and ecological interactions of Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera) in the tropics , 2016, ZooKeys.
[191] H. Itakura,et al. Environmental DNA analysis reveals the spatial distribution, abundance, and biomass of Japanese eels at the river‐basin scale , 2019, Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.
[192] P. Taberlet,et al. Next‐generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding , 2016, Molecular ecology.
[193] A. Keeley,et al. Filtration recovery of extracellular DNA from environmental water samples. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.
[194] Lauren M. Sassoubre,et al. Biomonitoring of marine vertebrates in Monterey Bay using eDNA metabarcoding , 2017, PloS one.
[195] R. Khelifa. Sensitivity of biodiversity indices to life history stage, habitat type and landscape in Odonata community , 2019, Biological Conservation.
[196] P. Taberlet,et al. Replication levels, false presences and the estimation of the presence/absence from eDNA metabarcoding data , 2015, Molecular ecology resources.
[197] B. Deagle,et al. Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples – a case study on DNA in faeces , 2006, Frontiers in Zoology.
[198] M. Kondoh,et al. Dispersion and degradation of environmental DNA from caged fish in a marine environment , 2019, Fisheries Science.
[199] V. I. Gusarov,et al. New environmental metabarcodes for analysing soil DNA: potential for studying past and present ecosystems , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[200] Carol A. Stepien,et al. Invasion genetics from eDNA and thousands of larvae: A targeted metabarcoding assay that distinguishes species and population variation of zebra and quagga mussels , 2019, Ecology and evolution.
[201] J. Semmens,et al. Application of environmental DNA to detect an endangered marine skate species in the wild , 2017, PloS one.
[202] Robert C. Edgar,et al. UCHIME2: improved chimera prediction for amplicon sequencing , 2016, bioRxiv.
[203] L. Waits,et al. Critical considerations for the application of environmental DNA methods to detect aquatic species , 2016 .
[204] C. Wiuf,et al. Monitoring endangered freshwater biodiversity using environmental DNA. , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[205] A. Rinaldo,et al. Estimating species distribution and abundance in river networks using environmental DNA , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[206] P. Taberlet,et al. DNA from soil mirrors plant taxonomic and growth form diversity. , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[207] S. Prosser,et al. DNA metabarcoding allows non-invasive identification of arthropod prey provisioned to nestling Rufous hummingbirds (Selasphorus rufus) , 2019, PeerJ.
[208] Nancy Knowlton,et al. Metazoan mitochondrial gene sequence reference datasets for taxonomic assignment of environmental samples , 2017, Scientific Data.
[209] P. Taberlet,et al. Unlocking biodiversity and conservation studies in high-diversity environments using environmental DNA (eDNA): A test with Guianese freshwater fishes. , 2018, Molecular ecology resources.
[210] H. Doi,et al. Water sampling for environmental DNA surveys by using an unmanned aerial vehicle , 2017 .
[211] T. Takahara,et al. Comparison of the detection of 3 endangered frog species by eDNA and acoustic surveys across 3 seasons , 2020, Freshwater Science.
[212] Yiyuan Li,et al. Quantification of mesocosm fish and amphibian species diversity via environmental DNA metabarcoding , 2015, Molecular ecology resources.
[213] P. Taberlet,et al. Body size determines soil community assembly in a tropical forest. , 2018, Molecular ecology.
[214] Satoshi Yamamoto,et al. Rapid degradation of longer DNA fragments enables the improved estimation of distribution and biomass using environmental DNA , 2017, Molecular ecology resources.
[215] L. Waits,et al. Using environmental DNA methods to improve detectability in a hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis) monitoring program , 2015 .
[216] M. Miya,et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding reveals local fish communities in a species-rich coastal sea , 2017, Scientific Reports.
[217] T. Porter,et al. Over 2.5 million COI sequences in GenBank and growing , 2018, PloS one.
[218] Jeremy R. deWaard,et al. DNA barcodes expose unexpected diversity in Canadian mites , 2019, Molecular ecology.
[219] J. Geist,et al. Environmental DNA as a monitoring tool for the endangered freshwater pearl mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera L.): a substitute for classical monitoring approaches? , 2016 .
[220] E. E. Sigsgaard,et al. Monitoring the near-extinct European weather loach in Denmark based on environmental DNA from water samples , 2015 .
[221] Yong Zhang,et al. Drivers of waterbird communities and their declines on Yangtze River floodplain lakes , 2018 .
[222] H. Kauserud,et al. ITS all right mama: investigating the formation of chimeric sequences in the ITS2 region by DNA metabarcoding analyses of fungal mock communities of different complexities , 2017, Molecular ecology resources.
[223] D. Buckley,et al. Factors governing extracellular DNA degradation dynamics in soil , 2018, Environmental microbiology reports.
[224] Mehrdad Hajibabaei,et al. Annual time-series analysis of aqueous eDNA reveals ecologically relevant dynamics of lake ecosystem biodiversity , 2017, Nature Communications.
[225] P. Taberlet,et al. Tracking earthworm communities from soil DNA , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[226] P. Taberlet,et al. Soil sampling and isolation of extracellular DNA from large amount of starting material suitable for metabarcoding studies , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[227] B. Emmett,et al. Acidity promotes degradation of multi-species environmental DNA in lotic mesocosms , 2018, Communications Biology.
[228] Alana L. Moore,et al. Assessing the cost‐efficiency of environmental DNA sampling , 2016 .
[229] J. Andrew Royle,et al. Scaling-up camera traps: monitoring the planet's biodiversity with networks of remote sensors , 2017 .
[230] R. L. Reimink,et al. Species-specific qPCR assays allow for high-resolution population assessment of four species avian schistosome that cause swimmer's itch in recreational lakes , 2019, International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife.
[231] G. Carvalho,et al. Environmental DNA size sorting and degradation experiment indicates the state of Daphnia magna mitochondrial and nuclear eDNA is subcellular , 2019, Scientific Reports.
[232] S. Pierce,et al. Differential biodiversity responses between kingdoms (plants, fungi, bacteria and metazoa) along an Alpine succession gradient , 2018, Molecular ecology.
[233] Jeffrey E. Hill,et al. Assessing Environmental DNA Detection in Controlled Lentic Systems , 2014, PloS one.
[234] Eric Coissac,et al. Bioinformatic challenges for DNA metabarcoding of plants and animals , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[235] A. Zhan,et al. Testing clustering strategies for metabarcoding‐based investigation of community–environment interactions , 2018, Molecular ecology resources.
[236] S. Mariani,et al. Biodiversity assessment of tropical shelf eukaryotic communities via pelagic eDNA metabarcoding , 2019, Ecology and evolution.
[237] R. Yamamoto,et al. Collective motion of cells crawling on a substrate: roles of cell shape and contact inhibition , 2016, Scientific Reports.
[238] Masayuki Ushio,et al. Water temperature-dependent degradation of environmental DNA and its relation to bacterial abundance , 2017, PloS one.
[239] M. P. Piggott. Evaluating the effects of laboratory protocols on eDNA detection probability for an endangered freshwater fish , 2016, Ecology and evolution.
[240] Kevin Leempoel,et al. A comparison of eDNA to camera trapping for assessment of terrestrial mammal diversity , 2019, bioRxiv.
[241] V. Ranwez,et al. A new versatile primer set targeting a short fragment of the mitochondrial COI region for metabarcoding metazoan diversity: application for characterizing coral reef fish gut contents , 2013, Frontiers in Zoology.
[242] S. Knudsen,et al. Comparison of capture and storage methods for aqueous macrobial eDNA using an optimized extraction protocol: advantage of enclosed filter , 2017 .
[243] Taal Levi,et al. The primacy of bears as seed dispersers in salmon‐bearing ecosystems , 2018 .
[244] H. MacIsaac,et al. Early detection of a highly invasive bivalve based on environmental DNA (eDNA) , 2018, Biological Invasions.
[245] J. Britton,et al. Environmental DNA as a non‐invasive sampling tool to detect the spawning distribution of European anadromous shads ( Alosa spp.) , 2019, Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.
[246] François Pompanon,et al. DNA metabarcoding and the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I marker: not a perfect match , 2014, Biology Letters.
[247] K. McKelvey,et al. Robust Detection of Rare Species Using Environmental DNA: The Importance of Primer Specificity , 2013, PloS one.
[248] R. Stadhouders,et al. The effect of primer-template mismatches on the detection and quantification of nucleic acids using the 5' nuclease assay. , 2010, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.
[249] N. Hattori,et al. New Alzheimer’s disease model mouse specialized for analyzing the function and toxicity of intraneuronal Amyloid β oligomers , 2019, Scientific Reports.
[250] Rob Knight,et al. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection , 2011, Bioinform..
[251] R. Huerlimann,et al. Parasitic protozoan interactions with bacterial microbiome in a tropical fish farm , 2019, Aquaculture.
[252] C. Moraes. What regulates mitochondrial DNA copy number in animal cells? , 2001, Trends in genetics : TIG.
[253] Vasco Elbrecht,et al. Can DNA-Based Ecosystem Assessments Quantify Species Abundance? Testing Primer Bias and Biomass—Sequence Relationships with an Innovative Metabarcoding Protocol , 2015, PloS one.
[254] Margaret E. Hunter,et al. Improving eDNA yield and inhibitor reduction through increased water volumes and multi-filter isolation techniques , 2019, Scientific Reports.
[255] S. Whyard,et al. Development and application of an eDNA method to detect and quantify a pathogenic parasite in aquatic ecosystems. , 2015, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.
[256] Geoffrey B. Smith,et al. Short RNA indicator sequences are not completely degraded by autoclaving , 2014, Scientific Reports.
[257] P. Sorensen,et al. Optimizing techniques to capture and extract environmental DNA for detection and quantification of fish , 2016, Molecular ecology resources.
[258] F. Chavez,et al. Environmental DNA reveals seasonal shifts and potential interactions in a marine community , 2020, Nature Communications.
[259] B. Deagle,et al. Quantifying sequence proportions in a DNA‐based diet study using Ion Torrent amplicon sequencing: which counts count? , 2013, Molecular ecology resources.
[260] J. Amberg,et al. Comparing Efficiency of American Fisheries Society Standard Snorkeling Techniques to Environmental DNA Sampling Techniques , 2017 .
[261] M. Bunce,et al. Testing multiple substrates for terrestrial biodiversity monitoring using environmental DNA metabarcoding , 2020, Molecular ecology resources.
[262] T. Pauley,et al. Using environmental DNA and occupancy modelling to identify drivers of eastern hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis alleganiensis) extirpation , 2018, Freshwater Biology.
[263] C. Goldberg,et al. Degradation and dispersion limit environmental DNA detection of rare amphibians in wetlands: Increasing efficacy of sampling designs. , 2018, The Science of the total environment.
[264] Lynsey R. Harper,et al. Development and application of environmental DNA surveillance for the threatened crucian carp (Carassius carassius ) , 2018, Freshwater Biology.
[265] G. Pazour,et al. Ror2 signaling regulates Golgi structure and transport through IFT20 for tumor invasiveness , 2017, Scientific Reports.
[266] S. Weiss,et al. Fish diversity assessment in the headwaters of the Volga River using environmental DNA metabarcoding , 2019, Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.
[267] W. L. Chadderton,et al. “Sight‐unseen” detection of rare aquatic species using environmental DNA , 2011 .
[268] Xiaowei Zhang,et al. Holistic pelagic biodiversity monitoring of the Black Sea via eDNA metabarcoding approach: From bacteria to marine mammals. , 2019, Environment international.
[269] M. Bunce,et al. Digging for DNA at depth: rapid universal metabarcoding surveys (RUMS) as a tool to detect coral reef biodiversity across a depth gradient , 2019, PeerJ.
[270] C. Robinson,et al. An optimised eDNA protocol for detecting fish in lentic and lotic freshwaters using a small water volume , 2019, PloS one.
[271] C. Hardy,et al. An environmental DNA‐based method for monitoring spawning activity: a case study, using the endangered Macquarie perch (Macquaria australasica) , 2017 .
[272] K. Coyne,et al. Improved Methods for Capture, Extraction, and Quantitative Assay of Environmental DNA from Asian Bigheaded Carp (Hypophthalmichthys spp.) , 2014, PloS one.
[273] T. Quinn,et al. Concentrations of environmental DNA (eDNA) reflect spawning salmon abundance at fine spatial and temporal scales , 2018 .
[274] L. Orlando,et al. Meta‐barcoding of ‘dirt’ DNA from soil reflects vertebrate biodiversity , 2012, Molecular ecology.
[275] H. Doi,et al. Use of Droplet Digital PCR for Estimation of Fish Abundance and Biomass in Environmental DNA Surveys , 2015, PloS one.
[276] C. Goldberg,et al. Spatial and temporal patterns of environmental DNA detection to inform sampling protocols in lentic and lotic systems , 2020, Ecology and evolution.
[277] M. Galan,et al. Metabarcoding for the parallel identification of several hundred predators and their preys: application to bat species diet analysis , 2017, bioRxiv.
[278] E. Harvey,et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding studies are critically affected by substrate selection , 2019, Molecular ecology resources.
[279] K. McKelvey,et al. Capture enrichment of aquatic environmental DNA: A first proof of concept , 2018, Molecular ecology resources.
[280] Erin K. Grey,et al. Early detection monitoring for aquatic non-indigenous species: Optimizing surveillance, incorporating advanced technologies, and identifying research needs. , 2017, Journal of environmental management.
[281] Jessie D Golding,et al. Using environmental DNA methods to improve winter surveys for rare carnivores: DNA from snow and improved noninvasive techniques , 2019, Biological Conservation.
[282] M. Berumen,et al. Beyond the visual: using metabarcoding to characterize the hidden reef cryptobiome , 2019, Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
[283] C. Davy,et al. Development and Validation of Environmental DNA (eDNA) Markers for Detection of Freshwater Turtles , 2015, PloS one.
[284] Hermann Neumann,et al. Metabarcoding of marine environmental DNA based on mitochondrial and nuclear genes , 2018, Scientific Reports.
[285] Lynsey R. Harper,et al. Finding Crush: Environmental DNA Analysis as a Tool for Tracking the Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas in a Marine Estuary , 2020, Frontiers in Marine Science.
[286] K. Walsh,et al. Performance of amplicon and shotgun sequencing for accurate biomass estimation in invertebrate community samples , 2018, Molecular ecology resources.
[287] Nancy Knowlton,et al. Random sampling causes the low reproducibility of rare eukaryotic OTUs in Illumina COI metabarcoding , 2017, PeerJ.
[288] G. Guillera‐Arroita,et al. Dealing with false‐positive and false‐negative errors about species occurrence at multiple levels , 2017 .
[289] Andrew S. Buxton,et al. Seasonal variation in environmental DNA in relation to population size and environmental factors , 2017, Scientific Reports.
[290] Beth Shapiro,et al. Minimizing polymerase biases in metabarcoding. , 2018, Molecular ecology resources.
[291] Robert S. Arkle,et al. Factors influencing detection of eDNA from a stream‐dwelling amphibian , 2014, Molecular ecology resources.
[292] P. Hebert,et al. bold: The Barcode of Life Data System (http://www.barcodinglife.org) , 2007, Molecular ecology notes.
[293] Kristy Deiner,et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding: Transforming how we survey animal and plant communities , 2017, Molecular ecology.
[294] D. Bolster,et al. Influence of Stream Bottom Substrate on Retention and Transport of Vertebrate Environmental DNA. , 2016, Environmental science & technology.
[295] V. Savolainen,et al. Behavior and season affect crayfish detection and density inference using environmental DNA , 2017, Ecology and evolution.
[296] Matthew A. Barnes,et al. The ecology of environmental DNA and implications for conservation genetics , 2016, Conservation Genetics.
[297] G. Daily,et al. Long-term declines in bird populations in tropical agricultural countryside , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
[298] R. Rodríguez-Estrella,et al. Comparing individual raptor species and coarse taxonomic groups as biodiversity surrogates in desert ecosystems , 2019, Biodiversity and Conservation.