ArticleDie Naturwissenschaften2019
Evaluating monitoring options for conservation: comparing traditional and environmental DNA tools for a critically endangered mammal.
Article in Die Naturwissenschaften, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- From environmental DNA into actionable biodiversity data: Towards the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.The Journal of heredity · 2026Review
- Hybrid Horizons: Screening Hybridisation Through Nuclear Environmental DNA.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- A Breath of Fresh Air: A Novel Passive Airborne eDNA Approach for Scalable Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Unlocking Demography: Developing an eDNA-Based Toolkit to Measure Sex Ratios From Populations.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- Evaluation of an eDNA protocol for detecting an endemic frog in the Zhoushan Archipelago.Current zoology · 2025Article
- More than presence-absence; modelling (e)DNA concentration across time and space from qPCR survey data.Journal of statistical theory and practice · 2025Article
- From eDNA to decisions using a multi-method approach to restoration planning in streams.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Inadvertent human genomic bycatch and intentional capture raise beneficial applications and ethical concerns with environmental DNA.Nature ecology & evolution · 2023Article
- Detection of the Endangered Siamese Bat Catfish (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Environmental DNA analysis as an emerging non-destructive method for plant biodiversity monitoring: a review.AoB PLANTS · 2022Review
- Using environmental DNA methods to improve detectability in an endangered sturgeon (Acipenser sinensis) monitoring program.BMC ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Environmental DNA monitoring of oncogenic viral shedding and genomic profiling of sea turtle fibropapillomatosis reveals unusual viral dynamics.Communications biology · 2021Article
- Meta-analysis shows that environmental DNA outperforms traditional surveys, but warrants better reporting standards.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Field application of an improved protocol for environmental DNA extraction, purification, and measurement using Sterivex filter.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Leveraging eDNA to expand the study of hybrid zones.Molecular ecology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While conservation management has made tremendous strides to date, deciding where, when and how to invest limited monitoring budgets is a central concern for impactful decision-making. New analytical tools, such as environmental DNA (eDNA), are now facilitating broader biodiversity monitoring at unprecedented scales, in part, due to time, and presumably cost, of methodological efficiency. Genetic approaches vary from conventional PCR (cPCR; species presence), to metabarcoding (community structure), and qPCR (relative DNA abundance, detection sensitivity). Knowing when to employ these techniques over traditional protocols could enable practitioners to make more informed choices concerning data collection. Using 12 species-specific primers designed for cPCR, eDNA analysis of the Yangtze finless porpoise (YFP; Neophocaena asiaeorientalis asiaeorientalis), a critically endangered aquatic mammal within the Yangtze River, we validated and optimized these primers for use in qPCR. We tested repeatability and sensitivity to detect YFP eDNA and subsequently compared the cost of traditional (visual and capture) sampling to eDNA tools. Our results suggest cPCR as the least expensive sampling option but the lack of PCR sensitivity suggests it may not be the most robust method for this taxon, predominately useful as a supplementary tool or with large expected populations. Alternatively, qPCR remained less expensive than traditional surveys, representing a highly repeatable and sensitive method for this behaviorally elusive species. Cost comparisons of surveying practices have scarcely been discussed; however, given budgetary constraints particularly for developing countries with limited local oversight but high endemism, we encourage managers to carefully consider the trade-offs among accuracy, cost, coverage, and speed for biodiversity monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30778682What 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.