Back

On-site metabarcoding analysis of environmental DNA samples

Mauvisseau, Q.; Ewer, I.; Blumeris, I.; Iren Bongo, S.; Filipe Brito de Oliveira, L.; Gouvea, B.; Carolina Cei, A.; Ferreira Rodrigues, K.; de Arruda Francisco, J.; Sletteng Garvang, E.; Marena do Rego Henriques, V.; Hurtado Solano, S.; Kvalheim, L.; Kaylynne Lawrence, S.; Ramalho Maciel, B.; Isanda Masaki, H.; Fortunate Mashaphu, M.; Masimula, L.; Prudent Mokgokong, S.; Katrin Onshuus, E.; Lima Paiva, B.; Parker-Allie, F.; Du Plessis, M.; Puzicha, M.; Gabriel Da Silva Solano Reis, O.; Speelman, G.; Moritz Splitthof, W.; Stocco de Lima, A. C.; Strindberg, H.; Smoge Saevik, O.; Tafjord, N. J. D

2026-03-30 ecology
10.64898/2026.03.27.714757 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Environmental DNA metabarcoding is a powerful monitoring tool for assessing aquatic biodiversity, as well as the sustainability and impacts of fisheries and aquaculture. However, conventional laboratory workflows remain time-consuming and dependent on dedicated infrastructures. Here, we present a field trial of a fully portable, off-grid eDNA metabarcoding pipeline that enables end-to-end analysis within a few days using compact equipment, including a BentoLab workstation and an Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) MinION sequencer. The workflow was implemented during two international training courses in Norway and Brazil, where students and early career researchers collected environmental samples, extracted and amplified DNA, prepared DNA libraries, and sequenced on-site before performing bioinformatics and statistical analyses. In the case study detailed here, seven eDNA samples collected and analysed on-site in the Oslofjord allowed detection of 16 fish and elasmobranch species. Although overall diversity was lower than in earlier studies using Illumina-based sequencing, our protocol reliably detected key species and demonstrates that portable eDNA metabarcoding is feasible for rapid ecological assessment, surveillance of high-risk regions and/or deployment in remote or resourcelZllimited settings.

Matching journals

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

1
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.9%
2
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
14.5%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 15%
12.6%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 6%
10.2%
50% of probability mass above
5
Environmental DNA
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
6
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 37%
4.0%
7
Water Research
74 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.8%
8
Limnology and Oceanography: Methods
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.5%
9
Metabarcoding and Metagenomics
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
10
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
11
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
12
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
13
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
14
Data in Brief
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
15
Frontiers in Marine Science
55 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
16
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
17
Communications Earth & Environment
14 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
18
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
19
ISME Communications
103 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
20
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.7%
21
Ecological Indicators
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
22
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
23
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
24
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
25
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
26
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 32%
0.5%