ArticlePloS one2017
A systematic approach to evaluate the influence of environmental conditions on eDNA detection success in aquatic ecosystems.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 148 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rewriting the history of the invasive spiny water flea in North America.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Spatial Complexity and Rare-Taxon Turnover Structures Benthic Coral Reef eDNA Communities.Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- Development and field evaluation of a multiplex qPCR assay for environmental DNA detection of Schistosoma mekongi and its intermediate snail host Neotricula aperta in the Mekong River Basin.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2026Article
- Review
- Segregating Sites Enhance Accuracy of Species Abundance Estimates From eDNA.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Article
- Proficiency testing and cross-laboratory method comparison to support standardisation of diatom DNA metabarcoding for freshwater biomonitoring.Metabarcoding and metagenomics · 2025Article
- A Genomic-Based Workflow for eDNA Assay Development for a Critically Endangered Turtle,Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Validating digital polymerase chain reaction for 16S rRNA gene amplification from low biomass environmental samples.ISME communications · 2025Article
- Revealing Elasmobranch Distributions in Turbid Coastal Waters: Insights From Environmental DNA and Particle Tracking.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Detection, movement and persistence of invertebrate eDNA in groundwater.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Optimizing detectability of the endangered fan mussel using eDNA and ddPCR.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Article
- Detection of vertebrates from natural and artificial inland water bodies in a semi-arid habitat using eDNA from filtered, swept, and sediment samples.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Evaluating the sampling effort for the metabarcoding-based detection of fish environmental DNA in the open ocean.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- A noninvasive eDNA tool for detecting sea lamprey larvae in river sediments: Analytical validation and field testing in a low-abundance ecosystem.Journal of fish biology · 2022Article
- Archiving time series sewage samples as biological records of built environments.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Review
- Molecular detection of giant snakeheads, Channa micropeltes (Cuvier, 1831), one of the most troublesome fish species.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Water pre-filtration methods to improve environmental DNA detection by real-time PCR and metabarcoding.PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of environmental DNA (eDNA) to determine the presence and distribution of aquatic organisms has become an important tool to monitor and investigate freshwater communities. The successful application of this method in the field, however, is dependent on the effectiveness of positive DNA verification, which is influenced by site-specific environmental parameters. Factors affecting eDNA concentrations in aquatic ecosystems include flow conditions, and the presence of substances that possess DNA-binding properties or inhibitory effects. In this study we investigated the influence of different environmental parameters on the detection success of eDNA using the invasive goby Neogobius melanostomus. In a standardized laboratory setup, different conditions of flow, sediment-properties, and fish density were compared, as well as different potential natural inhibitors such as algae, humic substances, and suspended sediment particles. The presence of sediment was mainly responsible for lower eDNA detection in the water samples, regardless of flow-through or standing water conditions and a delayed release of eDNA was detected in the presence of sediment. Humic substances had the highest inhibitory effect on eDNA detection followed by algae and siliceous sediment particles. The results of our study highlight that a successful application of eDNA methods in field surveys strongly depends on site-specific conditions, such as water flow conditions, sediment composition, and suspended particles. All these factors should be carefully considered when sampling, analyzing, and interpreting eDNA detection results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.