ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2020
A comparison of eDNA to camera trapping for assessment of terrestrial mammal diversity.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Properties and Limitations of eDNA Substrates for Terrestrial Animal Monitoring.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Review
- Non-destructive environmental DNA extracted from owl pellet contents: A valuable tool for monitoring mammalian species richness.PloS one · 2026Article
- Evaluation of an eDNA protocol for detecting an endemic frog in the Zhoushan Archipelago.Current zoology · 2025Article
- Spider Webs, Soil or Leaf Swabs to Detect Environmental DNA From Terrestrial Vertebrates: What Is the Best Substrate?Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Sapsucker Wells as a Keystone Nutritional Resource: Evaluating Methods for Detection of Secondary Sap Consumers.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Network dynamics revealed from eDNA highlight seasonal variation in urban mammal communities.The Journal of animal ecology · 2025Article
- A pilot study using eDNA collected from soil and active air samplers to detect terrestrial vertebrates in an open grassland habitat of central Queensland, Australia.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- Predator-specific mortality of sage-grouse nests based on predator DNA on eggshells.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Comparison of soil eDNA to camera traps for assessing mammal and bird community composition and site use.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Under-Appreciated Phylogroup Diversity ofApplied and environmental microbiology · 2023Article
- Sampling methodology influences habitat suitability modeling for chiropteran species.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Current research and future directions for realizing the ideal One-Health approach: A summary of key-informant interviews in Japan and a literature review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Review
- Sampling environmental DNA from trees and soil to detect cryptic arboreal mammals.Scientific reports · 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 provides quantitative estimates of Pacific hake abundance and distribution in the open ocean.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Before environmental DNA (eDNA) can establish itself as a robust tool for biodiversity monitoring, comparison with existing approaches is necessary, yet is lacking for terrestrial mammals. Moreover, much is unknown regarding the nature, spread and persistence of DNA shed by animals into terrestrial environments, or the optimal experimental design for understanding these potential biases. To address some of these challenges, we compared the detection of terrestrial mammals using eDNA analysis of soil samples against confirmed species observations from a long-term (approx. 9-year) camera-trapping study. At the same time, we considered multiple experimental parameters, including two sampling designs, two DNA extraction kits and two metabarcodes of different sizes. All mammals regularly recorded with cameras were detected in eDNA. In addition, eDNA reported many unrecorded small mammals whose presence in the study area is otherwise documented. A long metabarcode (≈220 bp) offering a high taxonomic resolution, achieved a similar efficiency as a shorter one (≈70 bp) and a phosphate buffer-based extraction gave similar results as a total DNA extraction method, for a fraction of the price. Our results support that eDNA-based monitoring should become a valuable part of ecosystem surveys, yet mitochondrial reference databases need to be enriched first.
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.