Swab vs rollers: a comparison of methods to collect eDNA from vegetative surfaces

Environmental DNA can be collected from vegetative surfaces circumventing the need for extensive equipment and multiple visits as often required by other sampling methods. This approach potentially offers a cost-effective and time-efficient means of capturing genetic material that can be used to provide valuable insights into terrestrial biodiversity. However, the effect of the material used to collect the sample is unknown. Here we compare the suitability of both clinical swabs and mini paint rollers to collect eDNA from vegetative surfaces in a bushland reserve in Western Australia. Both methods detected diverse eukaryote communities. There were no significant differences in ZOTU richness or community composition between the approaches, although the paint rollers had slightly higher cumulative richness. The choice between the two methods will likely be determined by logistical constraints: paint rollers are more expensive, bigger, and may be more susceptible to contamination but sample a greater surface area and can be readily attached to poles to access difficult to reach areas. Clinical swabs come sterile, are relatively small, and cheaper, but have limited reach and would require modification of poles. Although the sample size was small, results presented here can help guide future surface-based eDNA studies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Research Notes
Published
2026-02-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-026-07701-0
Primary Topic
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Swab vs rollers: a comparison of methods to collect eDNA from vegetative surfaces

Mieke van der Heyde, Paul Nevill, Marina Elisa de Oliveira
BMC Research Notes
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
article

Swab vs rollers: a comparison of methods to collect eDNA from vegetative surfaces

Mieke van der Heyde, Paul Nevill, Marina Elisa de Oliveira
article en

Abstract

Environmental DNA can be collected from vegetative surfaces circumventing the need for extensive equipment and multiple visits as often required by other sampling methods. This approach potentially offers a cost-effective and time-efficient means of capturing genetic material that can be used to provide valuable insights into terrestrial biodiversity. However, the effect of the material used to collect the sample is unknown. Here we compare the suitability of both clinical swabs and mini paint rollers to collect eDNA from vegetative surfaces in a bushland reserve in Western Australia. Both methods detected diverse eukaryote communities. There were no significant differences in ZOTU richness or community composition between the approaches, although the paint rollers had slightly higher cumulative richness. The choice between the two methods will likely be determined by logistical constraints: paint rollers are more expensive, bigger, and may be more susceptible to contamination but sample a greater surface area and can be readily attached to poles to access difficult to reach areas. Clinical swabs come sterile, are relatively small, and cheaper, but have limited reach and would require modification of poles. Although the sample size was small, results presented here can help guide future surface-based eDNA studies.

BMC Research NotesVol. 19(1)
Curtin University (AU)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
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.