Back

Interspecific allometric scaling in eDNA production in fishes reflects physiological and surface area allometry

Yates, M. C.; Wilcox, T.; Stoeckle, M.; Heath, D.

2022-04-22 ecology
10.1101/2022.04.22.489177 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Relating environmental DNA (eDNA) signal strength to organism abundance requires a fundamental understanding of eDNA production. A number of studies have demonstrated that eDNA production may scale allometrically - that is, larger organisms tend to exhibit lower mass-specific eDNA production rates, likely due to allometric scaling in key processes related to eDNA production (e.g. surface area, excretion/egestion). While most previous studies have examined intra-specific allometry, physiological rates and organism surface area also scale allometrically across species. We therefore hypothesize that eDNA production will similarly exhibit inter-specific allometric scaling. To evaluate this hypothesis, we reanalyzed previously published eDNA data from Stoeckle et al. (2021) which compared metabarcoding read count to organism count and biomass data obtained from trawl surveys. Using a Bayesian model we empirically estimated the value of the allometric scaling coefficient ( b) for bony fishes to be 0.67 (credible interval = 0.58 - 0.77), although our model failed to converge for chondrichthyan species. We found that integrating allometry significantly improved correlations between organism abundance and metabarcoding read count relative to traditional metrics of abundance (density and biomass) for bony fishes. Although substantial unexplained variation remains in the relationship between read count and organism abundance, our study provides evidence that eDNA production tends to scale allometrically across species. Future studies investigating the relationship between eDNA signal strength and metrics of fish abundance could potentially be improved by accounting for allometry - a scaling coefficient value of [~]2/3 appears to be both theoretically and empirically justified.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.