ArticleScientific reports2025
Multi-species eDNA as a screening tool to facilitate early detection and eradication of aquatic invasive species in large water bodies.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeted eDNA Survey Enables Consistent Detection of the Invasive Blue Crab in Trans-Border Adriatic Coastal-Marine Ecosystems.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Leveraging artificial intelligence to enhance marine biosecurity.Bioscience · 2026Review
- Classifying avian drinking behaviour: ecological insights and implications in a changing world.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026Review
- Conservation Planning and Reporting Implications of qPCR-based Multi-species eDNA Detection Under EU Environmental Regulations.Environmental management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aquatic invasive species can devastate native biodiversity and human water infrastructure. Effective eradication relies on early detection. However, commonly used visual surveys are ineffective for detection of small populations of submerged invasive species in large water bodies. Here, we explored detection of invasive aquatic plants, animals (vertebrate and invertebrate), and pathogens using 10 environmental DNA (eDNA) water sampling events every two weeks between June and October, 2018, informing ideal sampling times for long-term early-detection monitoring. The highest number of species detections across taxa were found using 6 replicates in late August and early September. Detections varied by taxon, with the most detections for fishes, followed by invertebrates, amphibians, and submerged plants. All expected species were detected with eDNA except for three terrestrial and emergent riparian plants. Reservoirs had the most consistent presence of AIS, suggesting that those systems and aquatic communities may be susceptible to new invasions. AIS detections occurred across more sites and water bodies than had been previously documented which provided evidence of silent invasions by species such as crayfishes, mollusks, and plants. We offer a framework for interpreting management response to low-read counts from multispecies eDNA sampling that balances interpretation of results with the cost of management responses.
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.