The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Environmental DNA surveillance for invertebrate species: advantages and technical limitations to detect invasive crayfish Procambarus clarkii in freshwater ponds
Abstract
Summary: The introduction of non‐native species is a major threat to biodiversity. While eradication programs of well‐established invaders are costly and hazardous for non‐target species, the early detection of a non‐native species at low density is critical for preventing biological invasions in recipient ecosystems. Recent studies reveal that environmental DNA(e DNA) is a powerful tool for detecting target species in aquatic ecosystems, but these studies focus mostly on fish and amphibians. We examine the reliability of using e DNA to detect the presence of an invasive freshwater crustacean species, the red swamp crayfishP rocambarus clarkii. Species‐specific primers and probes were designed; their specificity was tested using in silicoPCR simulations and against tissues of other crayfish species. Limits of detection and quantification were specified for the target DNA sequence by means of quantitative PCR amplifications on dilution series of known amount ofP. clarkiiDNA. The method was applied to water samples collected in 158 ponds in a F rench N ature P ark, and results were compared to a traditional method using food‐baited funnel traps. Environmental DNA had a better detection efficiency but predominantly led to divergent results compared with the trapping method. While habitat features partly explained the failure of crayfish detection by trapping, detection by e DNA was problematic at low crayfish abundances. WhenP. clarkii was detected, the estimated concentrations of crayfish DNA in water samples were always below the limit of quantification for the target DNA sequence. Synthesis and applications. The combination of environmental DNA(e DNA) and conventional trapping methods is recommended to monitor the invasion byP. clarkii in small waterbodies such as ponds. However, the risk of mortality for non‐target species, notably amphibians, has to be carefully evaluated before large‐scale deployment of traps. Contrary to fish and amphibians, a low amount of extracellular DNA in water is suspected to be the major limitation for crayfish detection by molecular approaches. Current advancements in PCR technology, together with optimization of the water sampling method, promise upcoming developments of e DNA detection for aquatic invertebrate species.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.
Guthery, F. S., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802723 · Cited by 41,495
Impacts of biological invasions: what's what and the way forward
Simberloff, D., Martin, J.-L., Genovesi, P., Maris, V., Wardle, D. A., Aronson, J., Courchamp, F., Galil, B., García-Berthou, E., Pascal, M., et al. (2013) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.013 · Cited by 3,344
High-throughput droplet digital PCR system for absolute quantitation of DNA copy number
Hindson, B. J., Ness, K. D., Masquelier, D. A., Belgrader, P., Heredia, N. J., Makarewicz, A. J., Bright, I. J., Lucero, M. Y., Hiddessen, A. L., Legler, T. C., et al. (2011) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac202028g · Cited by 2,792
Vogelstein, B., & Kinzler, K. W. (1999) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.96.16.9236 · Cited by 1,770
Whale, A. S., Huggett, J. F., Cowen, S., Speirs, V., Shaw, J., Ellison, S., Foy, C. A., & Scott, D. J. (2012) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gks203 · Cited by 453 · cited 3×
“dPCR is more appropriate than classical qPCR to the detection of small amounts of DNA molecules, and it is also more tolerant to inhibitors and does not need to rely on references or standards (Whale et al. 2012).”
BackgroundMethod
Cited by
Environmental DNA – An emerging tool in conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity
Thomsen, P. F., & Willerslev, E. (2015) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.019 · Cited by 2,082
Biggs, J., Ewald, N., Valentini, A., Gaboriaud, C., Dejean, T., Griffiths, R. A., Foster, J., Wilkinson, J. W., Arnell, A., Brotherton, P., et al. (2015) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.029 · Cited by 503
Self-citationSeasonal variation in environmental DNA in relation to population size and environmental factors
Buxton, A. S., Groombridge, J. J., Zakaria, N. B., & Griffiths, R. A. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep46294 · Cited by 203
Environmental DNA as an efficient tool for detecting invasive crayfishes in freshwater ponds
Mauvisseau, Q., Coignet, A., Delaunay, C., Pinet, F., Bouchon, D., & Souty-Grosset, C. (2018) · Hydrobiologia · doi:10.1007/s10750-017-3288-y · Cited by 60
Metadata
- Authors
- Tréguier, A., Paillisson, J., Dejean, T., Valentini, A., Schlaepfer, M. A., & Roussel, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-05-21
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 871-879
- ISSN
- 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2664
- OpenAlex
- W2060350250
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 18.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Environmental DNA surveillance for invertebrate species: advantages and technical limitations to detect invasive crayfish Procambarus clarkii in freshwater ponds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1365-2664.12262
- The paper
- Tréguier, A., Paillisson, J., Dejean, T., Valentini, A., Schlaepfer, M. A., & Roussel, J. (2014). Environmental DNA surveillance for invertebrate species: advantages and technical limitations to detect invasive crayfish Procambarus clarkii in freshwater ponds. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12262
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.