Explore the vast range of titles available.

Recent advances in sequencing technologies now permit the analyses of plant DNA from fossil samples (ancient plant DNA, plant aDNA), and thus enable the molecular reconstruction of palaeofloras.Hitherto, ancient frozen soils have proved excellent in preservingDNAmolecules, and have thus been the most commonly used source of plant aDNA. However, DNA from soil mainly represents taxa growing a fewmetres fromthe sampling point. Lakes have larger catchment areas and recent studies have suggested that plant aDNAfromlake sediments is a more powerful tool for palaeofloristic reconstruction. Furthermore, lakes can be found globally in nearly all environments, and are therefore not limited to perennially frozen areas. Here,we review the latest approaches and methods for the study of plant aDNA from lake sediments and discuss the progressmade up to the present.Weargue that aDNAanalyses add newand additional perspectives for the study of ancient plant populations and, in time, will provide higher taxonomic resolution and more precise estimation of abundance. Despite this, key questions and challenges remain for such plant aDNA studies. Finally, we provide guidelines on technical issues, including lake selection, and we suggest directions for future research on plant aDNA studies in lake sediments.

Loss of biodiversity from lower to upper trophic levels reduces overall productivity and stability of coastal ecosystems in our oceans, but rarely are these changes documented across both time and space. The characterisation of environmental DNA (eDNA) from sediment and seawater using metabarcoding offers a powerful molecular lens to observe marine biota and provides a series of ‘snapshots’ across a broad spectrum of eukaryotic organisms. Using these next-generation tools and downstream analytical innovations including machine learning sequence assignment algorithms and co-occurrence network analyses, we examined how anthropogenic pressures may have impacted marine biodiversity on subtropical coral reefs in Okinawa, Japan. Based on 18 S ribosomal RNA, but not ITS2 sequence data due to inconsistent amplification for this marker, as well as proxies for anthropogenic disturbance, we show that eukaryotic richness at the family level significantly increases with medium and high levels of disturbance. This change in richness coincides with compositional changes, a decrease in connectedness among taxa, an increase in fragmentation of taxon co-occurrence networks, and a shift in indicator taxa. Taken together, these findings demonstrate the ability of eDNA to act as a barometer of disturbance and provide an exemplar of how biotic networks and coral reefs may be impacted by anthropogenic activities.

Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis allows the simultaneous examination of organisms across multiple trophic levels and domains of life, providing critical information about the complex biotic interactions related to ecosystem change. Here we used multilocus amplicon sequencing of eDNA to survey biodiversity from an eighteen-month (2015–2016) time-series of seawater samples from Monterey Bay, California. The resulting dataset encompasses 663 taxonomic groups (at Family or higher taxonomic rank) ranging from microorganisms to mammals. We inferred changes in the composition of communities, revealing putative interactions among taxa and identifying correlations between these communities and environmental properties over time. Community network analysis provided evidence of expected predator-prey relationships, trophic linkages, and seasonal shifts across all domains of life. We conclude that eDNA-based analyses can provide detailed information about marine ecosystem dynamics and identify sensitive biological indicators that can suggest ecosystem changes and inform conservation strategies. Increasingly, eDNA is being used to infer ecological interactions. Here the authors sample eDNA over 18 months in a marine environment and use co-occurrence network analyses to infer potential interactions among organisms from microbes to mammals, testing how they change over time in response to oceanographic factors.

Environmental DNA (eDNA) surveys are increasingly being used for biodiversity monitoring, principally because they are sensitive and can provide high resolution community composition data. Despite considerable progress in recent years, eDNA studies examining how different environmental sample types can affect species detectability remain rare. Comparisons of environmental samples are especially important for providing best practice guidance on early detection and subsequent mitigation of non-indigenous species. Here we used eDNA metabarcoding of COI (cytochrome c oxidase subunit I) and 18S (nuclear small subunit ribosomal DNA) genes to compare community composition between sediment and water samples in artificial coastal sites across the United Kingdom. We first detected markedly different communities and a consistently greater number of distinct operational taxonomic units in sediment compared to water. We then compared our eDNA datasets with previously published rapid assessment biodiversity surveys and found excellent concordance among the different survey techniques. Finally, our eDNA surveys detected many non-indigenous species, including several newly introduced species, highlighting the utility of eDNA metabarcoding for both early detection and temporal / spatial monitoring of non-indigenous species. We conclude that careful consideration on environmental sample type is needed when conducting eDNA surveys, especially for studies assessing community change.

Anthropogenically forced changes in global freshwater biodiversity demand more efficient monitoring approaches. Consequently, environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis is enabling ecosystem-scale biodiversity assessment, yet the appropriate spatio-temporal resolution of robust biodiversity assessment remains ambiguous. Here, using intensive, spatio-temporal eDNA sampling across space (five rivers in Europe and North America, with an upper range of 20–35 km between samples), time (19 timepoints between 2017 and 2018) and environmental conditions (river flow, pH, conductivity, temperature and rainfall), we characterise the resolution at which information on diversity across the animal kingdom can be gathered from rivers using eDNA. In space, beta diversity was mainly dictated by turnover, on a scale of tens of kilometres, highlighting that diversity measures are not confounded by eDNA from upstream. Fish communities showed nested assemblages along some rivers, coinciding with habitat use. Across time, seasonal life history events, including salmon and eel migration, were detected. Finally, effects of environmental conditions were taxon-specific, reflecting habitat filtering of communities rather than effects on DNA molecules. We conclude that riverine eDNA metabarcoding can measure biodiversity at spatio-temporal scales relevant to species and community ecology, demonstrating its utility in delivering insights into river community ecology during a time of environmental change. Using intensive eDNA sampling in space and time across five rivers in Europe and North America, this study shows that eDNA gives relevant information on freshwater diversity and ecology across broad taxonomic groups, and with limited downstream transport. The findings demonstrate that eDNA is vital for freshwater biodiversity monitoring in a time of anthropogenic change.

The use of environmental DNA (eDNA) in biodiversity assessments offers a step-change in sensitivity, throughput and simultaneous measures of ecosystem diversity and function. There remains, however, a need to examine eDNA persistence in the wild through simultaneous temporal measures of eDNA and biota. Here, we use metabarcoding of two markers of different lengths, derived from an annual time series of aqueous lake eDNA to examine temporal shifts in ecosystem biodiversity and in an ecologically important group of macro-invertebrates (Diptera: Chironomidae). The analyses allow different levels of detection and validation of taxon richness and community composition (beta-diversity) through time, with shorter eDNA fragments dominating the eDNA community. Comparisons between eDNA, community DNA, taxonomy and UK species abundance data further show significant relationships between diversity estimates derived across the disparate methodologies. Our results reveal the temporal dynamics of eDNA and validate the utility of eDNA metabarcoding for tracking seasonal diversity at the ecosystem scale.

Biodiversity is changing at an accelerating rate at both local and regional scales. Beta diversity, which quantifies species turnover between these two scales, is emerging as a key driver of ecosystem function that can inform spatial conservation. Yet measuring biodiversity remains a major challenge, especially in aquatic ecosystems. Decoding environmental DNA (eDNA) left behind by organisms offers the possibility of detecting species sans direct observation, a Rosetta Stone for biodiversity. While eDNA has proven useful to illuminate diversity in aquatic ecosystems, its utility for measuring beta diversity over spatial scales small enough to be relevant to conservation purposes is poorly known. Here we tested how eDNA performs relative to underwater visual census (UVC) to evaluate beta diversity of marine communities. We paired UVC with 12S eDNA metabarcoding and used a spatially structured hierarchical sampling design to assess key spatial metrics of fish communities on temperate rocky reefs in southern California. eDNA provided a more-detailed picture of the main sources of spatial variation in both taxonomic richness and community turnover, which primarily arose due to strong species filtering within and among rocky reefs. As expected, eDNA detected more taxa at the regional scale (69 vs. 38) which accumulated quickly with space and plateaued at only ~ 11 samples. Conversely, the discovery rate of new taxa was slower with no sign of saturation for UVC. Based on historical records in the region (2000–2018) we found that 6.9 times more UVC samples would be required to detect 50 taxa compared to eDNA. Our results show that eDNA metabarcoding can outperform diver counts to capture the spatial patterns in biodiversity at fine scales with less field effort and more power than traditional methods, supporting the notion that eDNA is a critical scientific tool for detecting biodiversity changes in aquatic ecosystems.

Water sampling and filtration of environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis have been performed by several different methods, and each method may yield a different species composition or eDNA concentration. Here, we investigated the eDNA of seawater samples directly collected by SCUBA to compare two widely used filtration methods: open filtration with a glass filter (GF/F) and enclosed filtration (Sterivex). We referred to biomass based on visual observation data collected simultaneously to clarify the difference between organism groups. Water samples were collected at two points in the Sea of Japan in May, September and December 2018. The respective samples were filtered through GF/F and Sterivex for eDNA extraction. We quantified the eDNA concentration of five fish and two cnidarian species by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) using species-specific primers/probe sets. A strong correlation of eDNA concentration was obtained between GF/F and Sterivex; the intercepts and slopes of the linear regression lines were slightly different in fish and jellyfish. The amount of eDNA detected using the GF/F filtration method was higher than that detected using Sterivex when the eDNA concentration was high; the opposite trend was observed when the eDNA concentration was relatively low. The concentration of eDNA correlated with visually estimated biomass; eDNA concentration per biomass in jellyfish was approximately 700 times greater than that in fish. We conclude that GF/F provides an advantage in collecting a large amount of eDNA, whereas Sterivex offers superior eDNA sensitivity. Both filtration methods are effective in estimating the spatiotemporal biomass size of target marine species.

Environmental DNA (eDNA) is increasingly popular as a useful non-invasive method to monitor and study biodiversity and community structure in freshwater and marine environments. To effectively extract eDNA from the filter surface is a fundamental factor determining the representativeness of the samples. We improved the eDNA extraction efficiency of an established Sterivex method by 12- to 16-fold using a larger volume of lysis buffer mix coupled with backflushing the cartridges. The DNeasy extraction column could be overloaded when the environmental sample input is high, possibly due to a higher nonspecific binding present in environmental samples, thus resulting in a relatively lower quantity measured. Therefore, we included an internal control DNA in the extraction to monitor the extraction and purification efficiencies in field samples, which is crucial for quantification of original eDNA concentration. The use of Takara Probe qPCR Mix supplemented with protein-based additives improved the robustness of the real time PCR assay on inhibitor-rich environmental samples, but prior purification by Qiagen PowerClean Pro Cleanup kit could be essential for inhibitor-rich water samples, even though the recovery rate was unexpectedly low (average 33.0%). The improved extraction and quantification complement the qualitative analyses including metabarcoding and metagenomics in field application.

Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding is revolutionizing the monitoring of aquatic biodiversity. The use of eDNA has the potential to enable non-invasive, cost-effective, time-efficient and high-sensitivity monitoring of fish assemblages. Although the capacity of eDNA metabarcoding to describe fish assemblages is recognised, research efforts are still needed to better assess the spatial and temporal variability of the eDNA signal and to ultimately design an optimal sampling strategy for eDNA monitoring. In this context, we sampled three different lakes (a dam reservoir, a shallow eutrophic lake and a deep oligotrophic lake) every 6 weeks for 1 year. We performed four types of sampling for each lake (integrative sampling of sub-surface water along transects on the left shore, the right shore and above the deepest zone, and point sampling in deeper layers near the lake bottom) to explore the spatial variability of the eDNA signal at the lake scale over a period of 1 year. A metabarcoding approach was applied to analyse the 92 eDNA samples in order to obtain fish species inventories which were compared with traditional fish monitoring methods (standardized gillnet samplings). Several species known to be present in these lakes were only detected by eDNA, confirming the higher sensitivity of this technique in comparison with gillnetting. The eDNA signal varied spatially, with shoreline samples being richer in species than the other samples. Furthermore, deep-water samplings appeared to be non-relevant for regularly mixed lakes, where the eDNA signal was homogeneously distributed. These results also demonstrate a clear temporal variability of the eDNA signal that seems to be related to species phenology, with most of the species detected in spring during the spawning period on shores, but also a peak of detection in winter for salmonid and coregonid species during their reproduction period. These results contribute to our understanding of the spatio-temporal distribution of eDNA in lakes and allow us to provide methodological recommendations regarding where and when to sample eDNA for fish monitoring in lakes.