Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40716085›Full record

ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2025

Environmental DNA as a tool for hydropower impact assessments: current status, special considerations, and future integration.

Kristine N Moody, Steven T Gardner, Line E Sundt-Hansen, Frode Fossøy, Dana N McCoskey, Katherine J Morrice, Brenda M Pracheil

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

7 authors.

Kristine N MoodyEnvironmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, 37831, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5697-2736
Steven T GardnerEnvironmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, 37831, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3997-2643
Line E Sundt-HansenNorwegian Institute for Nature Research, P.O. Box 5685 Torgarden, Trondheim, 7458, Norway.
Frode FossøyNorwegian Institute for Nature Research, P.O. Box 5685 Torgarden, Trondheim, 7458, Norway.
Dana N McCoskeyOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Water Power Technologies Office, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 20585, USA.
Katherine J MorriceCoastal Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, 99354, USA.
Brenda M PracheilEarth Systems Science Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, 99354, USA.

Funding

Norwegian Research Centre for Hydropower Technology 257588US Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies OfficeUT-Battelle, LLC DE-AC05-00OR22725
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Globally there is an urgent need to find sustainable solutions to balance energy production with the protection of vulnerable species and conservation of biodiversity. This is particularly critical for freshwater ecosystems, habitats, and species that may be impacted by hydropower development and operations needed to meet energy grid demands. Reliable and accurate environmental impact assessments (EIAs) that identify the biological, physical, or social impacts of hydropower are key to ensure biodiversity, ecosystem, and societal sustainability. The analysis of environmental DNA (eDNA) has the potential to transform hydropower EIAs, management and mitigation planning, and decision-making procedures. Further, the incorporation of eDNA surveys into EIAs during both hydropower planning and continued operations may streamline regulatory processes by improving our understanding of potentially impacted biota and habitats and evaluating environmental impacts mitigation. Here, we: (i) highlight current understanding and use of eDNA in freshwater environments; (ii) examine critical considerations for eDNA integration into hydropower EIAs and biological monitoring; (iii) identify knowledge gaps in eDNA analysis and applications unique to hydropower-regulated systems; and (iv) discuss future opportunities to bolster the incorporation of eDNA into hydropower research including regulatory acceptance and public engagement. While we acknowledge that there are several factors that may complicate the broad adoption of eDNA as a tool for assessing the impacts of hydropower, we anticipate that growing confidence in eDNA through hydropower-specific protocols, calibrations, and validations will overcome these inherent uncertainties.

Indexed as

DNA, EnvironmentalEnvironmental MonitoringPower PlantsAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemFresh WaterDNA, Environmentalaquatic biodiversityenvironmental impact assessmentsmolecular biomonitoringreservoirsriverine systems

Identifiers

PMID40716085
PMCPMC12586288

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.