Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Sampling environmental DNA from trees and soil to detect cryptic arboreal mammals
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Sampling environmental DNA from trees and soil to detect cryptic arboreal mammals
Do you wish to request the book?
Sampling environmental DNA from trees and soil to detect cryptic arboreal mammals
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Sampling environmental DNA from trees and soil to detect cryptic arboreal mammals
2023
Overview
Environmental DNA (eDNA) approaches to monitoring biodiversity in terrestrial environments have largely focused on sampling water bodies, potentially limiting the geographic and taxonomic scope of eDNA investigations. We assessed the performance of two strictly terrestrial eDNA sampling approaches to detect arboreal mammals, a guild with many threatened and poorly studied taxa worldwide, within two central New Jersey (USA) woodlands. We evaluated species detected with metabarcoding using two eDNA collection methods (tree bark vs. soil sampling), and compared the performance of two detection methods (qPCR vs. metabarcoding) within a single species. Our survey, which included 94 sampling events at 21 trees, detected 16 species of mammals, representing over 60% of the diversity expected in the area. More DNA was found for the 8 arboreal versus 8 non-arboreal species detected (mean: 2466 vs. 289 reads/sample). Soil samples revealed a generally similar composition, but a lower diversity, of mammal species. Detection rates for big brown bat were 3.4 × higher for qPCR over metabarcoding, illustrating the enhanced sensitivity of single-species approaches. Our results suggest that sampling eDNA from on and around trees could serve as a useful new monitoring tool for cryptic arboreal mammal communities globally.
Publisher
Nature Publishing Group UK,Nature Publishing Group,Nature Portfolio
