The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Persistence of Environmental DNA in Freshwater Ecosystems
Open accessAbstract
The precise knowledge of species distribution is a key step in conservation biology. However, species detection can be extremely difficult in many environments, specific life stages and in populations at very low density. The aim of this study was to improve the knowledge on DNA persistence in water in order to confirm the presence of the focus species in freshwater ecosystems. Aquatic vertebrates (fish: Siberian sturgeon and amphibian: Bullfrog tadpoles) were used as target species. In control conditions (tanks) and in the field (ponds), the DNA detectability decreases with time after the removal of the species source of DNA. DNA was detectable for less than one month in both conditions. The density of individuals also influences the dynamics of DNA detectability in water samples. The dynamics of detectability reflects the persistence of DNA fragments in freshwater ecosystems. The short time persistence of detectable amounts of DNA opens perspectives in conservation biology, by allowing access to the presence or absence of species e.g. rare, secretive, potentially invasive, or at low density. This knowledge of DNA persistence will greatly influence planning of biodiversity inventories and biosecurity surveys.
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
Reliable genotyping of samples with very low DNA quantities using PCR
Taberlet, P. (1996) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/24.16.3189 · Cited by 1,491
Self-citationDirect and indirect effects of UV radiation on DNA and its components
Ravanat, J.-L., Douki, T., & Cadet, J. (2001) · Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology · doi:10.1016/s1011-1344(01)00206-8 · Cited by 980 · cited 1×
“UV radiation [28] and DNA uptake by micro-organisms, as source of nutriments (carbon, nitrogen and phosphorous) and to repair their own DNA damages [29], contribute also to damage and decrease DNA molecules density.”
Background
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
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
Distance, flow and PCR inhibition: e DNA dynamics in two headwater streams
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) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12285 · Cited by 549
Factors influencing detection of eDNA from a stream‐dwelling amphibian
Pilliod, D. S., Goldberg, C. S., Arkle, R. S., & Waits, L. P. (2014) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12159 · Cited by 517
Metadata
- Authors
- Dejean, T., Valentini, A., Duparc, A., Pellier-Cuit, S., Pompanon, F., Taberlet, P., & Miaud, C.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2011-08-08
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e23398
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2026764344
- Cited by
- 685
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 17.49
- 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: Persistence of Environmental DNA in Freshwater Ecosystems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0023398
- The paper
- Dejean, T., Valentini, A., Duparc, A., Pellier-Cuit, S., Pompanon, F., Taberlet, P., & Miaud, C. (2011). Persistence of Environmental DNA in Freshwater Ecosystems. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023398
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.
