Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 282

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Environmental DNA as a ‘Snapshot’ of Fish Distribution: A Case Study of Japanese Jack Mackerel in Maizuru Bay, Sea of Japan

Open access
Yamamoto, Satoshi, Minami, Kenji, Fukaya, Keiichi, Takahashi, Kohji, Sawada, Hideki, Murakami, Hiroaki, Tsuji, Satsuki, Hashizume, Hiroki, Kubonaga, Shou, Horiuchi, Tomoya, Hongo, Masamichi, Nishida, Jo, Okugawa, Yuta, Fujiwara, Ayaka, Fukuda, Miho, Hidaka, Shunsuke, Suzuki, Keita W., Miya, Masaki, Araki, Hitoshi, Yamanaka, Hiroki, Maruyama, Atsushi, Miyashita, Kazushi, Masuda, Reiji, Minamoto, Toshifumi, Kondoh, Michio·2016·PLOS ONE

Abstract

Recent studies in streams and ponds have demonstrated that the distribution and biomass of aquatic organisms can be estimated by detection and quantification of environmental DNA (eDNA). In more open systems such as seas, it is not evident whether eDNA can represent the distribution and biomass of aquatic organisms because various environmental factors (e.g., water flow) are expected to affect eDNA distribution and concentration. To test the relationships between the distribution of fish and eDNA, we conducted a grid survey in Maizuru Bay, Sea of Japan, and sampled surface and bottom waters while monitoring biomass of the Japanese jack mackerel (Trachurus japonicus) using echo sounder technology. A linear model showed a high R(2) value (0.665) without outlier data points, and the association between estimated eDNA concentrations from the surface water samples and echo intensity was significantly positive, suggesting that the estimated spatial variation in eDNA concentration can reflect the local biomass of the jack mackerel. We also found that a best-fit model included echo intensity obtained within 10-150 m from water sampling sites, indicating that the estimated eDNA concentration most likely reflects fish biomass within 150 m in the bay. Although eDNA from a wholesale fish market partially affected eDNA concentration, we conclude that eDNA generally provides a 'snapshot' of fish distribution and biomass in a large area. Further studies in which dynamics of eDNA under field conditions (e.g., patterns of release, degradation, and diffusion of eDNA) are taken into account will provide a better estimate of fish distribution and biomass based on eDNA.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0149786

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.

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 282

Metadata

Authors
Yamamoto, S., Minami, K., Fukaya, K., Takahashi, K., Sawada, H., Murakami, H., Tsuji, S., Hashizume, H., Kubonaga, S., Horiuchi, T., Hongo, M., Nishida, J., Okugawa, Y., Fujiwara, A., Fukuda, M., Hidaka, S., Suzuki, K. W., Miya, M., Araki, H., Yamanaka, H., Maruyama, A., Miyashita, K., Masuda, R., Minamoto, T., & Kondoh, M.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2016-03-02
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
e0149786
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2289856109
Cited by
282
References
0
FWCI
24.99
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: Environmental DNA as a ‘Snapshot’ of Fish Distribution: A Case Study of Japanese Jack Mackerel in Maizuru Bay, Sea of Japan. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0149786
The paper
Yamamoto, S., Minami, K., Fukaya, K., Takahashi, K., Sawada, H., Murakami, H., Tsuji, S., Hashizume, H., Kubonaga, S., Horiuchi, T., Hongo, M., Nishida, J., Okugawa, Y., Fujiwara, A., Fukuda, M., Hidaka, S., Suzuki, K. W., Miya, M., Araki, H., . . . Kondoh, M. (2016). Environmental DNA as a ‘Snapshot’ of Fish Distribution: A Case Study of Japanese Jack Mackerel in Maizuru Bay, Sea of Japan. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149786

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.