Environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling strategies influence estimates of lake fish eDNA concentrations | Knowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems

Open Access

Issue		Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. Number 427, 2026 Conservation genetics


Article Number		9
Number of page(s)		7
DOI		https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2026004
Published online		20 February 2026

Akaike H. 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19: 716–723. [Google Scholar]
Akaike H. 1978. On the likelihood of a time series model. J R Stat Soc Ser D Stat 27: 217–235. [Google Scholar]
Brooks ME, Kristensen K, van Benthem KJ, Magnusson A, Berg CW, Nielsen A, Skaug HJ, Mächler M, Bolker BM. 2017. glmmTMB balances speed and flexibility among packages for zero-inflated generalized linear mixed modeling. The R Journal 9: 378–400. [Google Scholar]
Capo E, Spong G, Koizumi S, Puts I, Olajos F, Königsson H, Karlsson J, Byström P. 2021. Droplet digital PCR applied to environmental DNA, a promising method to estimate fish population abundance from humic-rich aquatic ecosystems. Environ DNA 3: 343–352. [Google Scholar]
Civade R, Dejean T, Valentini A, Roset N, Raymond JC, Bonin A, Taberlet P, Pont D. 2016. Spatial representativeness of environmental DNA metabarcoding signal for fish biodiversity assessment in a natural freshwater system. PLOS ONE 11: e0157366. [Google Scholar]
Condachou C, Coutant O, Brosse S, Murienne J. 2024. Evaluating the eDNA spatial signal in natural populations and its application for the monitoring of the threatened Harttiella (Siluriformes, Loricariidae). Limnol Oceanogr: Methods 22: 660–669. [Google Scholar]
Djurhuus A, Port J, Closek CJ, Yamahara KM, Romero-Maraccini O, Walz KR, Goldsmith DB, Michisaki R, Breitbart M, Boehm AB, Chavez FP. 2017. Evaluation of filtration and DNA extraction methods for environmental DNA biodiversity assessments across multiple trophic levels. Front Mar Sci 4. [Google Scholar]
Doi H, Takahara T, Minamoto T, Matsuhashi S, Uchii K, Yamanaka H. 2015. Droplet digital Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) outperforms Real-Time PCR in the detection of environmental DNA from an invasive fish species. Environ Sci Technol 49: 5601–5608. [Google Scholar]
Edmunds RC, Burrows D. 2020. Got glycogen?: Development and multispecies validation of the novel preserve, precipitate, lyse, precipitate, purify (PPLPP) workflow for environmental DNA extraction from Longmire’s preserved water samples. J Biomol Tech 31: 125–150. [Google Scholar]
Eichmiller JJ, Miller LM, Sorensen PW. 2016. Optimizing techniques to capture and extract environmental DNA for detection and quantification of fish. Mol Ecol Resour 16: 56–68. [Google Scholar]
Hervé A, Domaizon I, Baudoin J-M, Dejean T, Gibert P, Jean P, Peroux T, Raymond J-C, Valentini A, Vautier M, Logez M. 2022. Spatio-temporal variability of eDNA signal and its implication for fish monitoring in lakes. PLOS ONE 17: e0272660. [Google Scholar]
Hervé A, Domaizon I, Baudoin J-M, Dejean T, Gibert P, Valentini A, Logez M. 2023. Do temperature and population size structure influence the quantity of fish eDNA in water? Front Environ Sci 11: 1193393. [Google Scholar]
Hinlo R, Gleeson D, Lintermans M, Furlan E. 2017. Methods to maximise recovery of environmental DNA from water samples. PLOS ONE 12: e0179251. [Google Scholar]
Jenny J-P, Avrillier J-N, Cachera S, Costel C, Crépin L, Iter-Desgué O, Goulon C, Guillard J, Hamelet V, Hustache J-C, Jacquet S, Lainé L, Perney P, Quétin P, Raphy J, Rautureau C, Rimet F, Rasconi S, Khac VT. 2024. Suivi environnemental des eaux du lac du Bourget pour l’année 2023. inrae hal-04682522. [Google Scholar]
Kirtane A, Deiner K. 2024. Improving the recovery for dissolved eDNA state: A comparative analysis of isopropanol precipitation, magnetic bead extraction, and centrifugal dialysis. Environ DNA 6: e572. [Google Scholar]
Kirtane A, Kleyer H, Deiner K. 2023. Sorting states of environmental DNA: Effects of isolation method and water matrix on the recovery of membrane-bound, dissolved, and adsorbed states of eDNA. Environ DNA 5: 582–596. [Google Scholar]
Lacoursière-Roussel A, Côté G, Leclerc V, Bernatchez L. 2015. Quantifying relative fish abundance with eDNA: a promising tool for fisheries management. J Appl Ecol 53: 1148–1157. [Google Scholar]
Lacoursière-Roussel A, Rosabal M, Bernatchez L. 2016. Estimating fish abundance and biomass from eDNA concentrations: variability among capture methods and environmental conditions. Mol Ecol Resour 16: 1401–1414. [Google Scholar]
Lenth RV. 2024. emmeans: estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1105. [Google Scholar]
Li X, Wu Y, Zhang L, Cao Y, Li Y, Li J, Zhu L, Wu G. 2014. Comparison of three common DNA concentration measurement methods. Anal Biochem 451: 18–24. [Google Scholar]
Min J, Kim KY. 2024. Optimal filter materials for protist quantification via droplet digital PCR. Algae 39: 51–56. [Google Scholar]
Miya M, Sato Y, Fukunaga T, Sado T, Poulsen JY, Sato K, Minamoto T, Yamamoto S, Yamanaka H, Araki H, Kondoh M, Iwasaki W. 2015. MiFish, a set of universal PCR primers for metabarcoding environmental DNA from fishes: detection of more than 230 subtropical marine species. R Soc Open Sci 2: 150088. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Peixoto S, Chaves C, Velo-Antón G, Beja P, Egeter B. 2021. Species detection from aquatic eDNA: Assessing the importance of capture methods. Environ DNA 3: 435–448. [Google Scholar]
Peixoto S, Mota-Ferreira M, Chaves C, Velo-Antón G, Beja P, Egeter B. 2023. Multi‐species occupancy modeling reveals methodological and environmental effects on eDNA detection of amphibians in temporary ponds. Environ DNA 5: 796–811. [Google Scholar]
Pont D, Rocle M, Valentini A, Civade R, Jean P, Maire A, Roset N, Schabuss M, Zornig H, Dejean T. 2018. Environmental DNA reveals quantitative patterns of fish biodiversity in large rivers despite its downstream transportation. Sci Rep 8: 10361. [Google Scholar]
R Development Core Team. 2023. R : a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [Google Scholar]
Rourke ML, Fowler AM, Hughes JM, Broadhurst MK, DiBattista JD, Fielder S, Wilkes Walburn J, Furlan EM. 2021. Environmental DNA (eDNA) as a tool for assessing fish biomass: a review of approaches and future considerations for resource surveys. Environ DNA 4: 9–33. [Google Scholar]
Spens J, Evans AR, Halfmaerten D, Knudsen SW, Sengupta ME, Mak SST, Sigsgaard EE, Hellström M. 2016. Comparison of capture and storage methods for aqueous macrobial eDNA using an optimized extraction protocol: advantage of enclosed filter. Methods Ecol Evol 8: 635–645. [Google Scholar]
STE. 2024. Rapport n°20-8342 Rapport Paladru 2023. Sciences et Techniques de l’Environnement, Le Bourget du Lac. [Google Scholar]
Takahara T, Minamoto T, Yamanaka H, Doi H, Kawabata Z. 2012. Estimation of fish biomass using environmental DNA. PLOS ONE 7: e35868. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Vautier M. 2024. Freshwater mussel eDNA: water sampling and filtration through Sterivex filter unit. protocols.io. [Google Scholar]
Vautier M, Galiegue C. 2024. Hydrogen peroxide decontamination of eDNA dedicated material. protocols.io. [Google Scholar]
Vautier M, Chardon C, Goulon C, Guillard J, Domaizon I. 2023. A quantitative eDNA-based approach to monitor fish spawning in lakes: application to European perch and whitefish. Fish Res 264: 106708. [Google Scholar]
Vautier M, Chardon C, Galiegue C, Domaizon I. 2024. eDNA extraction from water samples filtered through Sterivex filter units (NucleoMag DNA/RNA Water Kit - MACHERY NAGEL). protocols.io. [Google Scholar]
Vautier M, Bylemans J, Baudoin J-M, Guillard J, Goulon C, Logez M, Domaizon I. 2025. Environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling strategies influence estimates of freshwater fish eDNA concentrations. figshare. Dataset. [Google Scholar]
Wickham H, Averick M, Bryan J, Chang W, McGowan L, François R, Grolemund G, Hayes A, Henry L, Hester J, Kuhn M, Pedersen T, Miller E, Bache S, Müller K, Ooms J, Robinson D, Seidel D, Spinu V, Takahashi K, Vaughan D, Wilke C, Woo K, Yutani H. 2019. Welcome to the Tidyverse. J Open Source Softw 4: 1686. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Yates MC, Gaudet-Boulay M, Garcia Machado E, Côté G, Gilbert A, Bernatchez L. 2023. How much is enough? Examining the sampling effort necessary to estimate mean eDNA concentrations in lentic systems. Environ DNA 5: 1527–1540. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.