Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 549

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Distance, flow and PCR inhibition: e DNA dynamics in two headwater streams

Jane, Stephen F., Wilcox, Taylor M., McKelvey, Kevin S., Young, Michael K., Schwartz, Michael K., Lowe, Winsor H., Letcher, Benjamin H., Whiteley, Andrew R.·2015·Molecular Ecology Resources

Abstract

Environmental DNA (e DNA) detection has emerged as a powerful tool for monitoring aquatic organisms, but much remains unknown about the dynamics of aquatic e DNA over a range of environmental conditions. DNA concentrations in streams and rivers will depend not only on the equilibrium between DNA entering the water and DNA leaving the system through degradation, but also on downstream transport. To improve understanding of the dynamics of e DNA concentration in lotic systems, we introduced caged trout into two fishless headwater streams and took e DNA samples at evenly spaced downstream intervals. This was repeated 18 times from mid‐summer through autumn, over flows ranging from approximately 1–96 L/s. We used quantitative PCR to relate DNA copy number to distance from source. We found that regardless of flow, there were detectable levels of DNA at 239.5 m. The main effect of flow on e DNA counts was in opposite directions in the two streams. At the lowest flows, e DNA counts were highest close to the source and quickly trailed off over distance. At the highest flows, DNA counts were relatively low both near and far from the source. Biomass was positively related to e DNA copy number in both streams. A combination of cell settling, turbulence and dilution effects is probably responsible for our observations. Additionally, during high leaf deposition periods, the presence of inhibitors resulted in no amplification for high copy number samples in the absence of an inhibition‐releasing strategy, demonstrating the necessity to carefully consider inhibition in e DNA analysis.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1755-0998.12285

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 549

Metadata

Authors
Jane, S. F., Wilcox, T. M., McKelvey, K. S., Young, M. K., Schwartz, M. K., Lowe, W. H., Letcher, B. H., & Whiteley, A. R.
Venue
Molecular Ecology Resources
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-06-13
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
216-227
ISSN
  • 1755-098X (ISSN-L)
  • 1755-0998
OpenAlex
W2119742475
Cited by
549
References
1
FWCI
21.26
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: Distance, flow and PCR inhibition: e DNA dynamics in two headwater streams. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1755-0998.12285
The paper
Jane, S. F., Wilcox, T. M., McKelvey, K. S., Young, M. K., Schwartz, M. K., Lowe, W. H., Letcher, B. H., & Whiteley, A. R. (2015). Distance, flow and PCR inhibition: e DNA dynamics in two headwater streams. Molecular Ecology Resources. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12285

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.