Comment: Metabarcoding outperforms traditional electrofishing in decapod and fish inventories, paving the way for enhanced biodiversity monitoring in the Caribbean

Comparing the effectiveness of electrofishing and environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding for surveying aquatic biodiversity is increasingly common, yet often compromised by methodological inconsistencies. This paper reviews the core physical and biological principles governing electrofishing efficiency—including voltage propagation, the Power Transfer Theory (PTT), current waveforms, and the critical role of water conductivity—showing how parameter choices drastically alter capture success. We critically examine a recent study by Baudry et al. (2025)comparing eDNA metabarcoding with electrofishing for fish and decapod inventories, identifying major shortcomings in their electrofishing protocols. Specifically, the use of sub-optimal frequencies, non-standardized waveforms (such as PEC), and a lack of precise conductivity and spatial data introduce severe biases that undermine their comparative conclusions. We emphasize that proper standardization of electrofishing gear settings and protocols is essential before drawing conclusions about relative efficiency. Ultimately, rather than functioning as competing techniques, electrofishing—which remains indispensable for quantitative data—and eDNA are complementary methods that require rigorous application for valid biodiversity assessments.