eDNA-based crayfish plague detection as practical tool for biomonitoring and risk assessment of A. astaci-positive crayfish populations
While environmental DNA (eDNA) approaches have the potential to revolutionize biodiversity research and monitoring, most aquatic biomonitoring and management programs still rely on conventional monitoring methodologies. Here we evaluated the suitability and robustness of an eDNA-based approach for the detection of the crayfish plague agent Aphanomyces astaci and assessed the capacity of this new method as practical tool for bioassessments in freshwater. The approach was examined in three case studies: case study A tested its use as biomonitoring tool to determine the range and density of A. astaci- infected crayfish populations in three different water systems. Case study B focussed on the identification of possible A. astaci infection sources, here an aquafarm. For case study C we assessed a migration front of infected crayfish near a native crayfish area. The eDNA-based detection allowed to infer local patterns and distribution limits of crayfish plague occurrence. Spore estimates in eDNA samples correlated significantly with catch per unit effort values and pathogen loads of captured A. astaci- positive crayfish obtained from trapping in running waters. We also showed that spore concentrations are detectable up to three kilometres downstream from hot spot areas of infected crayfish. By identifying a possible A. astaci entry point and migration front eDNA proved suitable for the detection of A. astaci spores at low population densities and/or pathogen levels of infected crayfish. The study provides conclusive evidence for the suitability of the eDNA approach as a tool for risk assessment and large-scale monitoring of A. astaci for a wide range of practical conservation issues of indigenous crayfish species.
KeywordsEnvironmental DNA Aphanomyces astaci Pacifastacus leniusculus Density dependence Biomonitoring Risk management
We are thankful to the fisheries administrations of the State of Hessen, namely Dr. Christian Köhler and Patrick Heinz (Regierungspräsidium Darmstadt), Guntram Ohm-Winter and Marlene Höfner (Regierungspräsidium Gießen) and Christoph Laczny (Regierungspräsidium Kassel) for funding this project. We would like to acknowledge Ulrike and Michael Lierz, who granted access to the aquafarm area. We gratefully acknowledge Trude Vrålstad (Norwegian Veterinary Institute) and David Strand (Norwegian Institute for Water Research) for sharing their broad knowledge on eDNA-based crayfish plague detection. We thank Berardino Cocchiararo, Silvia Mort-Farre and Julia Mann for field and laboratory assistance. We would like to acknowledge Christoph Dümpelmann and Rainer Hennings for valuable information on local crayfish distribution. We also thank the unknown reviewers for their helpful comments to improve the manuscript.
This work was funded (Grant F7/2012) and fishing permits were granted by the State of Hessen, represented by the regional authorities Regierungspräsidien Darmstadt, Gießen and Kassel.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.
- Agersnap S, Larsen WB, Knudsen SW, Strand D, Thomsen PF, Hesselsøe M, Mortensen PB, Vrålstad T, Møller PR (2017) Monitoring of noble, signal and narrow-clawed crayfish using environmental DNA from freshwater samples. PLoS ONE 12:e0179261. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179261 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Alderman DJ, Polglase JL (1988) Pathogens, parasites and commensals. In: Holdich DM, Lowery RS (eds) Freshwater crayfish. Biology, management and exploitation. Croom Helm, London, pp 167–212Google Scholar
- Bálint M, Nowak C, Márton O, Pauls S, Wittwer C, Aramayo JL, Schulze A, Chambert T, Cocchiararo B, Jansen M (2018) Accuracy, limitations and cost efficiency of eDNA-based community survey in tropical frogs. Mol Ecol Resour 18:1415–1426. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12934 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Biggs J, Ewald N, Valentini A, Gaboriaud C, Dejean T, Griffiths RA, Foster J, Wilkinson JW, Arnell A, Brotherton P, Williams P, Dunn F (2015) Using eDNA to develop a national citizen science-based monitoring programme for the great crested newt (Triturus cristatus). Biol Conserv 183:19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Crandall KA (2017a) Astacus astacus (Linnaeus, 1758). World Register of Marine Species. http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=877649. Accessed 30 January 2018
- Crandall KA (2017b) Pacifastacus leniusculus (Dana, 1852). World Register of Marine Species. http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=885106. Accessed 24 January 2018
- DAISIE European Invasive Alien Species Gateway (2008) Aphanomyces astaci. http://www.europe-aliens.org/speciesFactsheet.do?speciesId=50122. Accessed 6 Nov 2017
- Dana JD (1852) Conspectus crustaceorum, & c. Conspectus of the Crustacea of the exploring expedition under Capt. C. Wilkes, U.S.N. Macroura. Proc Acad Nat Sci Phila 6:10–28Google Scholar
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02171.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Edsman L, Füreder L, Gherardi F, Souty-Grosset C (2010) Astacus astacus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2010: e.T2191A9338388. Accessed 16 Aug 2018Google Scholar
- Evans LH, Edgerton BF (2002) Pathogens, parasites and commensals. In: Holdich DM (ed) Biology of freshwater crayfish. Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford, pp 377–438Google Scholar
- Fukumoto S, Ushimaru A, Minamoto T, Crispo E (2015) A basin-scale application of environmental DNA assessment for rare endemic species and closely related exotic species in rivers. A case study of giant salamanders in Japan. J Appl Ecol 52:358–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12392 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Goldberg CS, Turner DR, Deiner K, Klymus KE, Thomsen PF, Murphy MA, Spear SF, McKee A, Oyler-McCance SJ, Cornman RS, Laramie MB, Mahon AR, Lance RF, Pilliod DS, Strickler KM, Waits LP, Fremier AK, Takahara T, Herder JE, Taberlet P, Gilbert M (2016) Critical considerations for the application of environmental DNA methods to detect aquatic species. Methods Ecol Evol 7:1299–1307. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12595 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hogger JB (1988) Ecology, population biology and behaviour. In: Holdich DM, Lowery RS (eds) Freshwater crayfish. Biology, management and exploitation. Croom Helm, London, pp 114–144Google Scholar
- Kozubíková-Balcarová E, Beran L, Ďuriš Z, Fischer D, Horká I, Svobodová J, Petrusek A (2014) Status and recovery of indigenous crayfish populations after recent crayfish plague outbreaks in the Czech Republic. Ethol Ecol Evol 26:299–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/03949370.2014.897652 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Larson ER, Renshaw MA, Gantz CA, Umek J, Chandra S, Lodge DM, Egan SP (2017) Environmental DNA (eDNA) detects the invasive crayfishes Orconectes rusticus and Pacifastacus leniusculus in large lakes of North America. Hydrobiologia 800:173–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-017-3210-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lodge DM, Turner CR, Jerde CL, Barnes MA, Chadderton L, Egan SP, Feder JL, Mahon AR, Pfrender ME (2012) Conservation in a cup of water: estimating biodiversity and population abundance from environmental DNA. Molecular Ecology 21 (11):2555–2558. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05600.x CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Peay S (2009) Selection criteria for “ark sites” for white-clawed crayfish. In: Brickland J, Holdich DM, Imhoff EM (eds) Crayfish conservation in the British isles. Leeds, UK, pp 63–69Google Scholar
- Robinson C, Uren-Webster T, Cable J, James J, Consuegra S (2018) Simultaneous detection of invasive signal crayfish, endangered white-clawed crayfish and the crayfish plague pathogen using environmental DNA. Biol Conserv 222:241–252. https://doi.org/10.1101/291856
- Schikora F (1906) Die Krebspest. Fischerei-Zeitung 9:529-532, 549-553, 561-566, 581-583Google Scholar
- Shepherd JE, Valentini A, Bell EM, Dejean T, Delft JJCW, Thomsen PF, Taberlet P (2014) Environmental DNA - a review of the possible applications for the detection of (invasive) species. Foundation RAVON, Nijmegen. report 2013-104Google Scholar
- Strand DA, Jussila J, Viljamaa-Dirks S, Kokko H, Makkonen J, Holst-Jensen A, Viljugrein H, Vrålstad T (2012) Monitoring the spore dynamics of Aphanomyces astaci in the ambient water of latent carrier crayfish. Vet Microbiol 160:99–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2012.05.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Taugbøl T, Skurdal J (1999) The future of native crayfish in Europe: How to make the best of a bad situation? In: Gherardi F, Holdich DM (eds) Crayfish in Europe as alien species. How to make the best of a bad situation?. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 167–212Google Scholar
- Taylor CA (2002) Taxonomy and conservation of native crayfish stocks. In: Holdich DM (ed) Biology of Freshwater Crayfish. Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford, pp 236–257Google Scholar
- Tréguier A, Paillisson J-M, Dejean T, Valentini A, Schlaepfer MA, Roussel J-M, Crispo E (2014) Environmental DNA surveillance for invertebrate species. Advantages and technical limitations to detect invasive crayfish Procambarus clarkii in freshwater ponds. J Appl Ecol 51:871–879. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12262 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Unestam T (1972) On the host range and origin of the crayfish plague fungus. Rep. Inst. Freshw. Res. Drottningholm 52:192–198Google Scholar
- Valentini A, Taberlet P, Miaud C, Civade R, Herder J, Thomsen PF, Bellemain E, Besnard A, Coissac E, Boyer F, Gaboriaud C, Jean P, Poulet N, Roset N, Copp GH, Geniez P, Pont D, Argillier C, Baudoin J-M, Peroux T, Crivelli AJ, Olivier A, Acqueberge M, Le Brun M, Moller PR, Willerslev E, Dejean T (2016) Next-generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Mol Ecol 25:929–942. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13428 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vrålstad T, Knutsen AK, Tengs T, Holst-Jensen A (2009) A quantitative TaqMan® MGB real-time polymerase chain reaction based assay for detection of the causative agent of crayfish plague Aphanomyces astaci. Vet Microbiol 137:146–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2008.12.022 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wilcox TM, McKelvey KS, Young MK, Sepulveda AJ, Shepard BB, Jane SF, Whiteley AR, Lowe WH, Schwartz MK (2016) Understanding environmental DNA detection probabilities. A case study using a stream-dwelling char Salvelinus fontinalis. Biol Conserv 194:209–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.12.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar