The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Environmental DNA analysis for estimating the abundance and biomass of stream fish
Abstract
Summary: Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis for detecting the presence of aquatic and terrestrial organisms is an established method, and the eDNA concentration of a species can reflect its abundance/biomass at a site. However, attempts to estimate the abundance/biomass of aquatic species using eDNA concentrations in large stream and river ecosystems have received little attention. We determined the eDNA concentration and abundance/biomass of a stream fish, Plecoglossus altivelis, by conducting a snorkelling survey in the Saba River, Japan. Furthermore, we evaluated the relationship between eDNA concentrations and the estimated abundance/biomass of P. altivelis, and determined its spatial distribution within the river. Across the three seasons from spring to autumn, we found significant correlations between the eDNA concentration of P. altivelis and its abundance/biomass at study sites within the river. We detected the eDNA at the sites where we found only feeding traces on stones (where P. altivelis was not directly observed), but not at sites without feeding traces. Additionally, we tested the optimal number of qPCR replicates needed for the eDNA evaluation of P. altivelis abundance and biomass; only a small number of replicates was required when the eDNA concentration was high. Our findings suggest that eDNA analysis is a useful tool to estimate fish abundance/biomass as well as their spatial distribution in rivers.
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
The MIQE guidelines: minimum information for publication of quantitative real-time PCR experiments
Bustin, S. A., Benes, V., Garson, J. A., Hellemans, J., Huggett, J., Kubista, M., Mueller, R., Nolan, T., Pfaffl, M. W., Shipley, G. L., et al. (2009) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2008.112797 · Cited by 16,303
Cited by
Environmental DNA metabarcoding: Transforming how we survey animal and plant communities
Deiner, K., Bik, H. M., Mächler, E., Seymour, M., Lacoursière‐Roussel, A., Altermatt, F., Creer, S., Bista, I., Lodge, D. M., de Vere, N., et al. (2017) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/mec.14350 · Cited by 1,918
Rourke, M. L., Fowler, A. M., Hughes, J. M., Broadhurst, M. K., DiBattista, J. D., Fielder, S., Wilkes Walburn, J., & Furlan, E. M. (2022) · Environmental DNA · doi:10.1002/edn3.185 · Cited by 435
Yates, M. C., Fraser, D. J., & Derry, A. M. (2019) · Environmental DNA · doi:10.1002/edn3.7 · Cited by 284
Seasonal 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
Lateral and longitudinal fish environmental DNA distribution in dynamic riverine habitats
Thalinger, B., Kirschner, D., Pütz, Y., Moritz, C., Schwarzenberger, R., Wanzenböck, J., & Traugott, M. (2021) · Environmental DNA · doi:10.1002/edn3.171 · Cited by 66
Metadata
- Authors
- Doi, H., Inui, R., Akamatsu, Y., Kanno, K., Yamanaka, H., Takahara, T., & Minamoto, T.
- Venue
- Freshwater Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-10-03
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 30-39
- ISSN
- 0046-5070 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2427
- OpenAlex
- W2528912016
- Cited by
- 356
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 24.99
- 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 analysis for estimating the abundance and biomass of stream fish. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/fwb.12846
- The paper
- Doi, H., Inui, R., Akamatsu, Y., Kanno, K., Yamanaka, H., Takahara, T., & Minamoto, T. (2017). Environmental DNA analysis for estimating the abundance and biomass of stream fish. Freshwater Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12846
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.