ArticlePloS one2019
Concurrent visual encounter sampling validates eDNA selectivity and sensitivity for the endangered wood turtle (Glyptemys insculpta).
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis: Water type and temperature affect environmental DNA decay.Molecular ecology resources · 2022Pooled it
- Characterizing the diversity and distribution of tropical coastal blue carbon using environmental DNA.iScience · 2025Article
- A comparative study on eDNA-based detection of Siamese bat catfish (Oreoglanis siamensis) in wet and dry conditions.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Environmental DNA-based biomonitoring of Cuban Crocodylus and their accompanying vertebrate fauna from Zapata Swamp, Cuba.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Assessing the breeding phenology of a threatened frog species using eDNA and automatic acoustic monitoring.PeerJ · 2023Article
- Environmental DNA methylation of Lymnaea stagnalis varies with age and is hypermethylated compared to tissue DNA.Molecular ecology resources · 2023Article
- Environmental DNA Metabarcoding: A Novel Contrivance for Documenting Terrestrial Biodiversity.Biology · 2022Review
- A review of applications of environmental DNA for reptile conservation and management.Ecology and evolution · 2022Review
- Environmental DNA detection of giant snakehead in Thailand's major rivers for wild stock assessment.PloS one · 2022Article
- Meta-analysis shows that environmental DNA outperforms traditional surveys, but warrants better reporting standards.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental DNA (eDNA) has been used to record the presence of many different organisms in several different aquatic and terrestrial environments. Although eDNA has been demonstrated as a useful tool for the detection of invasive and/or cryptic and declining species, this approach is subject to the same considerations that limit the interpretation of results from traditional survey techniques (e.g. imperfect detection). The wood turtle is a cryptic semi-aquatic species that is declining across its range and, like so many chelonian species, is in-need of a rapid and effective method for monitoring distribution and abundance. To meet this need, we used an eDNA approach to sample for wood turtle presence in northern Virginia streams. At the same time, we used repeat visual encounter surveys in an occupancy-modelling framework to validate our eDNA results and reveal the relationship of detection and occupancy for both methods. We sampled 37 stream reaches of varying size within and beyond the known distribution of the wood turtle across northern Virginia. Wood turtle occupancy probability was 0.54 (0.31, 0.76) and while detection probability for wood turtle occupancy was high (0.88; 0.58, 0.98), our detection of turtle abundance was markedly lower (0.28; 0.21, 0.37). We detected eDNA at 76% of sites confirmed occupied by VES and at an additional three sites where turtles were not detected but were known to occur. Environmental DNA occupancy probability was 0.55 (0.29, 0.78); directly comparable to the VES occupancy estimate. Higher probabilities of detecting wood turtle eDNA were associated with higher turtle densities, an increasing number of days since the last rainfall, lower water temperatures, and lower relative discharges. Our results suggest that eDNA technology holds promise for sampling aquatic chelonians in some systems, even when discharge is high and biomass is relatively low, when the approach is validated and sampling error is quantified.
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.