Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36751629›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2023

Using eDNA sampling for species-specific fish detection in tropical oceanic samples: limitations and recommendations for future use.

Giovanna M Gonzalez Colmenares, Alejandro J Gonzalez Montes, Chelsea A Harms-Tuohy, Nikolaos V Schizas

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Giovanna M Gonzalez ColmenaresDepartment of Biology, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Mayagüez, Mayagüez, Puerto Rico.
Alejandro J Gonzalez MontesDepartment of Marine Sciences, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Mayagüez, Mayagüez, Puerto Rico.
Chelsea A Harms-TuohyIsla Mar Research Expeditions, Rincón, Puerto Rico.
Nikolaos V SchizasDepartment of Marine Sciences, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Mayagüez, Mayagüez, Puerto Rico.
University of Puerto Rico-Mayaguez · PRUniversity of Puerto Rico System · PR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Over the past decade, environmental DNA (eDNA) has become a resourceful tool in conservation and biomonitoring. Environmental DNA has been applied in a variety of environments, but the application to studies of marine fish, particularly at tropical latitudes, are limited. Since many commercially important Caribbean fishes are overexploited, these species are optimal candidates to explore the use of this method as a biomonitoring tool. Specifically, for many of these species, the formation of fish spawning aggregations (FSAs) marks a critical life history event where fishes will gather in large numbers for reproduction. These FSAs are ephemeral in nature, lasting only a few days, but are predictable in time and space which makes them susceptible to overfishing. Methods: In this study, we test the feasibility of using an eDNA sampling approach (water and sediment collection) to detect the presence of known FSAs off the west coast of Puerto Rico, with cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (CO1) and 12S rRNA (12S) primers designed to target specific species. A total of 290 eDNA samples were collected and, of those, 206 eDNA samples were processed. All eDNA samples varied in DNA concentration, both between replicates and collection methods. A total of 12 primer sets were developed and tested using traditional PCR and qPCR. Results: Despite validation of primer accuracy and sample collection during known peak spawning times, the use of traditional PCR and qPCR with both molecular markers failed to produce species-specific amplification. Thus, a trial test was conducted using the CO1 primers in which target fish DNA was 'spiked' at various concentrations into the respective eDNA samples to determine the target species DNA concentration limit of detection. Upon successful amplification of the trial, results indicated that eDNA samples were below the detection threshold of our methods, suggesting that the number of fish present at the spawning aggregations was inadequate for single-species detection methods. In addition, elements such as the unavoidable presence of non-target DNA, oceanic environmental conditions, shedding rates of target fish, among other biotic and abiotic factors could have affected DNA persistence and degradation rates at the sites. Conclusion: We provide recommendations for species-specific fish detection in lower latitudes, and suggestions for studies aiming to monitor or detect fish spawning aggregations using eDNA sampling.

Indexed as

DNA, EnvironmentalAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesDNAFisheriesFishesPuerto RicoDNADNA, EnvironmentaleDNA samplingFisheries managementFish spawning aggregationsSpecies-specific detectionTropical eDNA

Identifiers

PMID36751629
PMCPMC9899429
OpenAlexW4319025429

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.