Back

Stemflow as a Storm-Driven Pathway for Fungal eDNA Transport

Valdman, B. W.; Jusko, B. M.; Burke, D.; Carrino-Kyker, S.; Krebs, R. A.; Van Stan, J. T.

2026-10-09 ecology
10.64898/2026.10.05.756909 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Stemflow transports water and biological material from forest canopies to the stem base, yet fungal studies of this flux have largely relied on microscopy of conidia. We used ITS2 metabarcoding to characterize fungal environmental DNA (eDNA) in stemflow from 15 trees - five each of American beech (Fagus grandifolia), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) in a closed-canopy forest in northeastern Ohio, USA. Stemflow was sampled during eight rain events in the leafless season (November 2024-May 2025), along with simulated bark and gutter washes to assess near-collar and collector signals. Natural stemflow communities were compositionally distinct from both controls and occupied greater ordination space. Ascomycota dominated across all samples, with Parafenestella, Cytospora, Microcera, Nectria, and Aureobasidium among the most abundant resolved genera and 13 of the 25 most abundant taxa differed significantly among host species. Woody-plant-associated endophytes, canker fungi, and saprobes dominated ecological guild composition. Storm event explained 28.6% of taxonomic variation, host tree species 24.1%, and their interaction 10.0%. Guild composition was more strongly structured by host species (35.4%) than storm event (20.4%). Lichenized fungi and lichen-associated fungi were detected. Thus, leafless-season stemflow integrates broad bark-associated fungal eDNA, including recurrent lichen-derived material, beyond the morphologically distinctive conidia captured by traditional methods. Stemflow eDNA therefore offers a minimally invasive means of monitoring canopy fungal diversity and the strong host and temporal filtering of DNA exported from woody surfaces.

Matching journals

The top 12 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.