Advertisement

Conservation Genetics Resources

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 115–118 | Cite as

Environmental DNA detection of redfin perch, Perca fluviatilis

  • Elise M. FurlanEmail author
  • Dianne Gleeson
Technical Note

Abstract

Invasive alien species are one of the leading causes of extinctions worldwide. Preventing their establishment, eradicating or containing their spread relies on low-density detection. Environmental DNA (eDNA) has been shown to have superior detection sensitivity compared to traditional methods, permitting detection at lower densities. Here, we develop a species-specific assay to detect Perca fluviatilis (redfin perch), an invasive freshwater fish present in Australia. We show that the assay is highly sensitive and highly specific to detect the species in Australian freshwater environments and demonstrate the utility of the assay for detecting the species from environmental water samples. This assay will prove useful for low-density detection of P. fluviatilis to assist in the management of this invader, with conservation benefits for the native species it threatens.

Keywords

eDNA Environmental DNA Detection Species-specific Redfin perch Perca fluviatilis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre (Project 1.W.2) for funding to conduct this research. We are grateful to C. M. Hardy, M. Lintermans and P. Unmack for advice and access to DNA samples, and to three anonymous reviewers for comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. Animal collections and holdings were carried out under ACT Government TAMS Licence to Take, Licence number LT2013661 and LT2013699 and University of Canberra CEAE 13-05.

Supplementary material

12686_2016_523_MOESM1_ESM.docx (22 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 21 kb)

References

  1. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ (1990) Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215:403–410. doi: 10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Benson DA, Karsch-Mizrachi I, Lipman DJ, Ostell J, Sayers EW (2009) GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res 37:D26–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Betancur-R R et al. (2013) The tree of life and a new classification of bony fishes. PLoS Curr 5. doi: 10.1371/currents.tol.53ba26640df0ccaee75bb165c8c26288
  4. Bomford M, O’Brien P (1995) Eradication or control for vertebrate pests? Wildl Soc Bull 23:249–255Google Scholar
  5. Clavero M, García-Berthou E (2005) Invasive species are a leading cause of animal extinctions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dejean T, Valentini A, Miquel C, Taberlet P, Bellemain E, Miaud C (2012) Improved detection of an alien invasive species through environmental DNA barcoding: the example of the American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus. J Appl Ecol 49:953–959. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02171.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fuller S, Baverstock P, King D (1998) Biogeographic origins of goannas (Varanidae): a molecular perspective. Mol Phylogenet Evol 9:294–307. doi: 10.1006/mpev.1997.0476 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Furlan EM, Gleeson DM, Hardy CM, Duncan RP (2015) A framework for estimating the sensitivity of eDNA surveys. Mol Ecol Resour. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12483 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hall TA (1999) BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis. Nucleic Acids Symp Ser 41:95–98Google Scholar
  10. Hardy CM, Adams M, Jerry DR, Court LN, Morgan MJ, Hartley DM (2011) DNA barcoding to support conservation: species identification, genetic structure and biogeography of fishes in the Murray–Darling River Basin, Australia. Mar Freshw Res 62:887–901. doi: 10.1071/mf11027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Janosik AM, Johnston CE (2015) Environmental DNA as an effective tool for detection of imperiled fishes. Environ Biol Fish 98:1889–1893. doi: 10.1007/s10641-015-0405-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jerde CL, Mahon AR, Chadderton WL, Lodge DM (2011) “Sight-unseen” detection of rare aquatic species using environmental DNA. Conserv Lett 4:150–157. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00158.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lintermans M (2001) Fish in the Upper Murrumbidgee Catchment. A review of Current knowledge. Wildlife Research & Monitoring, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  14. Lintermans M (2007) Fishes of the Murray–Darling Basin: an introductory guide. Murray-Darling Basin Authority, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  15. McLeod R (2004) Counting the cost: impact of invasive animals in Australia. Cooperative Research Centre for Pest Animal Control, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  16. Rowe D, Moore A, Giorgetti A, Maclean C, Grace P, Wadhwa S, Cooke J (2008) Review of the impacts of gambusia, redfin perch, tench, roach, yellowfin goby and streaked goby in Australia. Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, ACTGoogle Scholar
  17. Sigsgaard EE, Carl H, Møller PR, Thomsen PF (2015) Monitoring the near-extinct European weather loach in Denmark based on environmental DNA from water samples. Biol Conserv 183:46–52. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Simberloff D et al (2013) Impacts of biological invasions: what’s what and the way forward. Trends Ecol Evol 28:58–66. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Smart AS, Tingley R, Weeks AR, van Rooyen AR, McCarthy MA (2015) Environmental DNA sampling is more sensitive than a traditional survey technique for detecting an aquatic invader. Ecol Appl 25:1944–1952. doi: 10.1890/14-1751.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Wager R, Jackson PD (1993) The action plan for Australian freshwater fishes. Australian Nature Conservation Agency, CanberraGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Applied EcologyUniversity of CanberraBruceAustralia

Personalised recommendations