Back

Process-based model predicts seasonal variation in eDNA transport - a case study on Eurasian beavers in a small river

Macarthur, J. A.; Pont, D.; Bouhouche, M.; Morrissey, B.; Griffiths, N. P.; Rosell, F.; Sonstebo, J. H.; Gaywood, M. J.; Hanfling, B.

2026-02-06 ecology
10.64898/2026.02.04.703803 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Robust methods to monitor species distributions are vital to ensuring successful conservation strategies, particularly in the case of conservation translocations. Environmental DNA (eDNA) from water samples is a cost-effective method to monitor species distributions without physical capture or disturbance. However, eDNA is vulnerable to long-distance transport depending on the hydrological and environmental characteristics which can lead to spatially false positives and ultimately inaccurate species distributions. Recently, the development of particle transport models has allowed researchers to integrate hydrological and environmental variables to predict how far eDNA will transport from a source point. Here, eDNA samples (n=218) were collected and quantified using digital PCR (dPCR) to study monthly changes in Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber) eDNA concentrations downstream of an enclosure which contained 4 - 5 beavers located in Scotland. The shortest eDNA transport distances (< 2 km) were observed in the summer which correlated with the lowest flows and highest temperatures. In contrast, throughout the winter eDNA was consistently detected up to 5.8 km downstream correlating with the highest discharge and lowest temperature. The eDNA transport model reliably reproduced the decrease in eDNA concentrations downstream of the enclosure, however there were challenges surrounding stream-specific decay rates following a confluence. To study localised species distributions, samples should be collected during summer low flow conditions. Conversely, to maximise species detections sampling should be conducted in winter which had the longest eDNA transport and highest detectability.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Environmental DNA
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.6%
2
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
18.7%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 9%
18.7%
50% of probability mass above
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 18%
6.4%
5
Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
6
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
7
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
8
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
9
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
10
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
11
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
12
Ecosphere
53 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
13
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
14
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
15
Limnology and Oceanography: Methods
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
16
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
17
Freshwater Biology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
18
Journal of Fish Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
19
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
20
Environmental Pollution
35 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
21
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.6%
22
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%