Comparing eDNA and eRNA Sampling Methodologies From Pond Environments

ABSTRACT Molecular traces are increasingly being applied to assess the presence of species and communities. Studies on environmental DNA (eDNA) have, to a large extent, become common practice in species detection, but less studies have compared biodiversity estimations with the more temporary environmental RNA (eRNA). This study compares metabarcoding results from pond water obtained from both molecule types by sequencing the V4 region in the 18S rRNA marker. Water was collected from two depths, 20 and 80 cm, and filtered sequentially through two filter porosities, 0.45 and 0.22 μm. Each filter was cut in half before fixation in either 96% ETOH or RNAlater. The results showed no differences between the fixatives for either molecule. Overall, biodiversity estimates from eDNA significantly overperformed eRNA, likely due to higher concentrations of eDNA from terrestrial sources. Comparisons of the two depths showed variation for eDNA only, with increasing levels of biodiversity found at the upper water layer. Both filter pore sizes captured distinctive compositions of taxa, where about 30% of the diversity was uniquely identified from the second, finer filter. Taken together, these findings imply that the choice of molecular marker, depth and filter pore size affects the obtained biodiversity estimations in a pond.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
Published
2025-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.70083
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.87

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparing eDNA and eRNA Sampling Methodologies From Pond Environments

Dawid Krawczyk, Klaudyna Królikowska, Dominik Strapagiel, Katarzyna Janik-Papis et al.
4 citations
Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
6.87
article

Comparing eDNA and eRNA Sampling Methodologies From Pond Environments

Dawid Krawczyk, Klaudyna Królikowska, Dominik Strapagiel, Katarzyna Janik-Papis, Karolina Bącela‐Spychalska, Michał Seweryn, Annette Taugbøl, Jakub Lach, Grzegorz Tończyk, Monika Baranowska
article en
4 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Molecular traces are increasingly being applied to assess the presence of species and communities. Studies on environmental DNA (eDNA) have, to a large extent, become common practice in species detection, but less studies have compared biodiversity estimations with the more temporary environmental RNA (eRNA). This study compares metabarcoding results from pond water obtained from both molecule types by sequencing the V4 region in the 18S rRNA marker. Water was collected from two depths, 20 and 80 cm, and filtered sequentially through two filter porosities, 0.45 and 0.22 μm. Each filter was cut in half before fixation in either 96% ETOH or RNAlater. The results showed no differences between the fixatives for either molecule. Overall, biodiversity estimates from eDNA significantly overperformed eRNA, likely due to higher concentrations of eDNA from terrestrial sources. Comparisons of the two depths showed variation for eDNA only, with increasing levels of biodiversity found at the upper water layer. Both filter pore sizes captured distinctive compositions of taxa, where about 30% of the diversity was uniquely identified from the second, finer filter. Taken together, these findings imply that the choice of molecular marker, depth and filter pore size affects the obtained biodiversity estimations in a pond.

Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater EcosystemsVol. 35(2)
University of Łódź (PL), Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NO)
Uniwersytet Łódzki, EEA Grants/Norway Grants
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
6.87
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.