Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

ProfessorVincentSavolainen

Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Life Sciences (Silwood Park)

Professor of Organismic Biology
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

v.savolainen CV

 
 
//

Assistant

 

Ms Elisabeth Ahlstrom +44 (0)20 7594 2207

 
//

Location

 

N.1-17MunroSilwood Park

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Fediajevaite:2021:10.1002/ece3.7382,
author = {Fediajevaite, J and Priestley, V and Arnold, R and Savolainen, V},
doi = {10.1002/ece3.7382},
journal = {Ecology and Evolution},
pages = {4803--4815},
title = {Meta-analysis shows that environmental DNA outperforms traditional surveys, but warrants better reporting standards},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7382},
volume = {11},
year = {2021}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - 1.  Decades of environmental DNA (eDNA) method application, spanning a wide variety of taxa and habitats, has advanced our understanding of eDNA and underlined its value as a tool for conservation practitioners. The general consensus is that eDNA methods are more accurate and costeffective than traditional survey methods. However, they are formally approved for just a few species globally (e.g., Bighead Carp, Silver Carp, Great Crested Newt). We conducted a metaanalysis of studies that directly compare eDNA with traditional surveys to evaluate the assertion that eDNA methods are consistently “better.”2.  Environmental DNA publications for multiple species or single macroorganism detection were identified using the Web of Science, by searching “eDNA” and “environmental DNA” across papers published between 1970 and 2020. The methods used, focal taxa, habitats surveyed, and quantitative and categorical results were collated and analyzed to determine whether and under what circumstances eDNA outperforms traditional surveys.3.  Results show that eDNA methods are cheaper, more sensitive, and detect more species than traditional methods. This is, however, taxadependent, with amphibians having the highest potential for detection by eDNA survey. Perhaps most strikingly, of the 535 papers reviewed just 49 quantified the probability of detection for both eDNA and traditional survey methods and studies were three times more likely to give qualitative statements of performance.4.  Synthesis and applications: The results of this metaanalysis demonstrate that where there is a direct comparison, eDNA surveys of macroorganisms are more accurate and efficient than traditional surveys. This conclusion, however, is based on just a fraction of available eDNA papers as most do not offer this granularity. We recommend that conclusions are substantiated with comparable and quantitative data. Where a direct comparison has not been made, we caution a
AU  - Fediajevaite,J
AU  - Priestley,V
AU  - Arnold,R
AU  - Savolainen,V
DO  - 10.1002/ece3.7382
EP  - 4815
PY  - 2021///
SN  - 2045-7758
SP  - 4803
TI  - Meta-analysis shows that environmental DNA outperforms traditional surveys, but warrants better reporting standards
T2  - Ecology and Evolution
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7382
UR  - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.7382
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/87910
VL  - 11
ER  -
Download