The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Molecular Detection of Vertebrates in Stream Water: A Demonstration Using Rocky Mountain Tailed Frogs and Idaho Giant Salamanders
Open accessAbstract
Stream ecosystems harbor many secretive and imperiled species, and studies of vertebrates in these systems face the challenges of relatively low detection rates and high costs. Environmental DNA (eDNA) has recently been confirmed as a sensitive and efficient tool for documenting aquatic vertebrates in wetlands and in a large river and canal system. However, it was unclear whether this tool could be used to detect low-density vertebrates in fast-moving streams where shed cells may travel rapidly away from their source. To evaluate the potential utility of eDNA techniques in stream systems, we designed targeted primers to amplify a short, species-specific DNA fragment for two secretive stream amphibian species in the northwestern region of the United States (Rocky Mountain tailed frogs, Ascaphus montanus, and Idaho giant salamanders, Dicamptodon aterrimus). We tested three DNA extraction and five PCR protocols to determine whether we could detect eDNA of these species in filtered water samples from five streams with varying densities of these species in central Idaho, USA. We successfully amplified and sequenced the targeted DNA regions for both species from stream water filter samples. We detected Idaho giant salamanders in all samples and Rocky Mountain tailed frogs in four of five streams and found some indication that these species are more difficult to detect using eDNA in early spring than in early fall. While the sensitivity of this method across taxa remains to be determined, the use of eDNA could revolutionize surveys for rare and invasive stream species. With this study, the utility of eDNA techniques for detecting aquatic vertebrates has been demonstrated across the majority of freshwater systems, setting the stage for an innovative transformation in approaches for aquatic research.
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
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
bold : The Barcode of Life Data System (http://www.barcodinglife.org)
RATNASINGHAM, S., & HEBERT, P. D. N. (2007) · Molecular Ecology Notes · doi:10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01678.x · Cited by 6,376
Occupancy Estimation and Modeling. Inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence
Yoccoz, N. G. (2006) · Wildlife Biology · doi:10.2981/0909-6396(2006)12[450:oeamip]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 2,300
Occupancy Estimation and Modeling: Inferring Patterns and Dynamics of Species Occurrence
MacKenzie, D. I. (2005) · Cited by 1,878
Freshwater biodiversity conservation: recent progress and future challenges
Strayer, D. L., & Dudgeon, D. (2010) · Journal of the North American Benthological Society · doi:10.1899/08-171.1 · Cited by 1,752
Species detection using environmental DNA from water samples
Ficetola, G. F., Miaud, C., Pompanon, F., & Taberlet, P. (2008) · Biology Letters · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2008.0118 · Cited by 1,707
BOLD : The Barcode of Life Data System (www.barcodinglife.org)
Ratnasingham, S., & Ebert, P. D. N. H. (2007) · Cited by 1,676
Extinction Rates of North American Freshwater Fauna
Ricciardi, A., & Rasmussen, J. B. (1999) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.98380.x · Cited by 1,316
“Sight‐unseen” detection of rare aquatic species using environmental DNA
Jerde, C. L., Mahon, A. R., Chadderton, W. L., & Lodge, D. M. (2011) · Conservation Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1755-263x.2010.00158.x · Cited by 1,304
Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity: Standard Methods for Amphibians.
Parmelee, J. R., Heyer, W. R., Donnelly, M. A., McDiarmid, R. W., Hayek, L.-A. C., & Foster, M. S. (1995) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.2307/2413714 · Cited by 1,279
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
Environmental Conditions Influence eDNA Persistence in Aquatic Systems
Barnes, M. A., Turner, C. R., Jerde, C. L., Renshaw, M. A., Chadderton, W. L., & Lodge, D. M. (2014) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es404734p · Cited by 939
Biodiversity soup: metabarcoding of arthropods for rapid biodiversity assessment and biomonitoring
Yu, D. W., Ji, Y., Emerson, B. C., Wang, X., Ye, C., Yang, C., & Ding, Z. (2012) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00198.x · Cited by 744
Reliable, verifiable and efficient monitoring of biodiversity via metabarcoding
Ji, Y., Ashton, L., Pedley, S. M., Edwards, D. P., Tang, Y., Nakamura, A., Kitching, R., Dolman, P. M., Woodcock, P., Edwards, F. A., et al. (2013) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12162 · Cited by 662
Fish environmental DNA is more concentrated in aquatic sediments than surface water
Turner, C. R., Uy, K. L., & Everhart, R. C. (2015) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.017 · Cited by 555
Metadata
- Authors
- Goldberg, C. S., Pilliod, D. S., Arkle, R. S., & Waits, L. P.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2011-07-26
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- e22746
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2015207775
- Cited by
- 592
- References
- 29
- FWCI
- 19.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Molecular Detection of Vertebrates in Stream Water: A Demonstration Using Rocky Mountain Tailed Frogs and Idaho Giant Salamanders. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0022746
- The paper
- Goldberg, C. S., Pilliod, D. S., Arkle, R. S., & Waits, L. P. (2011). Molecular Detection of Vertebrates in Stream Water: A Demonstration Using Rocky Mountain Tailed Frogs and Idaho Giant Salamanders. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022746
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.