Back

Species-specific versus community-wide assays in eDNA monitoring of European eel Anguilla anguilla: Trade-offs between detection sensitivity and the value of additional community data

Monaghan, A. I. T.; Sellers, G. S.; Griffiths, N. P.; Lawson Handley, L.; Hänfling, B.; Macarthur, J. A.; Wright, R. M.; Bolland, J. D.

2026-03-20 ecology
10.64898/2026.03.19.712641 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Effective monitoring of the critically endangered European eel (Anguilla anguilla) is essential for conservation planning and regulatory decision-making, particularly in heavily fragmented rivers. Environmental DNA (eDNA) methods offer sensitive alternatives to traditional surveys, but there is uncertainty around whether targeted assays or community-wide approaches are better suited to achieve monitoring objectives. We compared eDNA metabarcoding and species-specific quantitative PCR (qPCR) for detecting A. anguilla across 145 pumped catchments in the Fens, East Anglia, England. All sites were sampled once initially, and sites negative for A. anguilla were re-sampled based on metabarcoding results. This allowed comparison of detection rates from a single water sample and site-level retrospective identification of sites where qPCR could have identified A. anguilla in earlier samples. The findings were also set in the context of the wider biodiversity information generated by metabarcoding. From the initial (single) water sample, qPCR detected A. anguilla at seven more sites than metabarcoding (17 versus 10). With repeated sampling, metabarcoding detected A. anguilla at 43 sites, including all but one of the sites where qPCR detected A. anguilla, and ten sites where qPCR did not detect A. anguilla within the same number of samples. Indeed, the additional sampling effort required to detect A. anguilla with metabarcoding at sites also positive with qPCR was small relative to the overall sampling effort. Furthermore, metabarcoding additionally detected 28 non-target fish species alongside fish, amphibian and mammal species of conservation concern. Our results highlight trade-offs between target-species sensitivity and the broader ecological information provided by each method, and support metabarcoding as an effective tool for a holistic conservation approach, with the additional community data outweighing the marginally increased sensitivity of qPCR.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Environmental DNA
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.2%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 20%
10.0%
3
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.3%
4
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.2%
5
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
6
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.9%
50% of probability mass above
7
Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.5%
9
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
10
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
11
Ecosphere
53 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.3%
12
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
13
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 46%
1.5%
14
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
15
Evolutionary Applications
91 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
16
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
17
Journal of Applied Ecology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
18
Journal of Fish Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
19
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
20
FACETS
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
21
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
22
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
23
Frontiers in Marine Science
55 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
24
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
25
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
26
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.7%
27
Freshwater Biology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
28
Diversity and Distributions
26 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
29
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
30
Conservation Genetics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%