Back

From Nets to Molecules: A Comparative Study of Stream Fish Diversity Recovery Using Different Sampling Methods in Eastern Amazonia

Rosa, F. d. A. S.; Carvalho, C. O.; Queiroz, A. K. O. d.; Silva, D. J. F.; Barreto, S. B.; Thorbek, B. L. G.; Sales, J. B. d. L.; Mauvisseau, Q.; de Boer, H. J.; Ready, J. S.

2025-01-03 genetics
10.1101/2025.01.02.631091 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The Neotropical freshwaters of South America host an exceptional level of ichthyofaunal diversity with over 5,160 species, making it the richest continental fauna worldwide. Despite their richness, these freshwater ecosystems face severe threats from human activities, leading to significant declines in fish populations. Traditional fish sampling techniques, such as netting, have been fundamental to ichthyology, offering insights into species richness and abundance. However, the complexity of stream environments limits the effectiveness of conventional sampling tools. As a result, more elusive or niche species are often missed. In recent years, water environmental DNA (eDNA) has emerged as a complementary method to traditional sampling. It allows for detection of aquatic organisms from water samples, expanding the scope of biodiversity assessments. Nevertheless, eDNA filtration faces challenges, especially in turbid waters, including the likelihood of co-extracting inhibitors that can affect amplification and detection processes, as well as the downstream flow of eDNA signals, which means that samples predominantly detect upstream fauna. To address these limitations, the use of bulk samples, such as stomach contents, provides a robust alternative by directly analyzing biological tissues and leveraging the bidirectional mobility of organisms within the stream, enabling the detection of taxa from both upstream and downstream regions. Given these issues, this study combines traditional netting, water eDNA analysis, and dietary metabarcoding to assess the fish biodiversity in three Neotropical streams in the Capim River basin, Para, Brazil. The integration of multiple sampling techniques offers a more accurate picture of biodiversity, helping to overcome the limitations of each individual method and providing essential insights for conservation efforts.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 7%
22.6%
2
Environmental DNA
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.4%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 6%
10.1%
4
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.2%
6
Journal of Fish Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
7
Ecological Indicators
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Aquaculture
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
9
Conservation Genetics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
10
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
11
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
12
Malaria Journal
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
13
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.0%
14
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
15
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
16
Hydrobiologia
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
17
Parasites & Vectors
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
18
FACETS
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
19
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
20
Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
21
BMC Genomics
328 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
22
Forensic Science International: Genetics
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.7%
23
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%