Advertisement

Environmental DNA sampling as a surveillance tool for cane toad Rhinella marina introductions on offshore islands

  • R. Tingley
  • M. Greenlees
  • S. Oertel
  • A. R. van Rooyen
  • A. R. Weeks
Invasion Note

Abstract

Containing the spread of established invasive species is critical for minimizing their ecological impact. Effective containment requires sensitive sampling methods capable of detecting new introductions when invaders are at low density. Here we explore whether environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling could be used as a surveillance tool to detect new incursions of aquatic invasive species on offshore islands. We develop an eDNA molecular assay for invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) in Australia, validate our assay on the mainland, and apply it to an offshore island (Moreton Island) that is a target of ongoing cane toad surveillance. Our eDNA assay correctly identified four mainland sites at which cane toads were observed, as well as a fifth site within 1 km of known populations. Five additional sites outside the cane toad’s current distribution tested negative for cane toad eDNA. Site occupancy detection models indicated that two water samples and three qPCR replicates were sufficient to achieve a cumulate detection probability > 0.95. Applying our eDNA assay to samples from 19 sites on an offshore island over a 2-year period revealed the absence of cane toad eDNA, in line with our current understanding of cane toad distribution. Our results suggest that eDNA sampling could be strategically applied to meet the Australian Commonwealth’s objective of maintaining cane toad-free offshore islands.

Keywords

eDNA Containment Detection probability Islands Sensitivity Surveillance 

Notes

Acknowledgements

RT and ARW were funded by the Australian Research Council Linkage Scheme (LP140100731). MG would like to thank Sutherland Shire Council and Sydney Metropolitan Local Land Services for funding, and Trent McKenna and George Madani for assistance in the field.

References

  1. Adrian-Kalchhauser I, Burkhardt-Holm P (2016) An eDNA assay to monitor a globally invasive fish species from flowing freshwater. PLoS ONE 11:e0147558.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147558 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Commonwealth of Australia (2011) Threat abatement plan for the biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion, caused by cane toads. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  3. Dejean T, Valentini A, Miquel C et al (2012) Improved detection of an alien invasive species through environmental DNA barcoding: the example of the American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus. J Appl Ecol 49:953–959.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02171.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dougherty MM, Larson ER, Renshaw MA et al (2016) Environmental DNA (eDNA) detects the invasive rusty crayfish Orconectes rusticus at low abundances. J Appl Ecol 53:722–732.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12621 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Epanchin-Niell RS, Hastings A (2010) Controlling established invaders: integrating economics and spread dynamics to determine optimal management. Ecol Lett 13:528–541.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01440.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kearney M, Phillips BL, Tracy CR et al (2008) Modelling species distributions without using species distributions: the cane toad in Australia under current and future climates. Ecography 31:423–434.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0906-7590.2008.05457.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lahoz-Monfort JJ, Guillera-Arroita G, Tingley R (2016) Statistical approaches to account for false-positive errors in environmental DNA samples. Mol Ecol Resour 16:673–685.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12486 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Lugg WH, Griffiths J, van Rooyen AR et al (2018) Optimal survey designs for environmental DNA sampling. Methods Ecol Evol 9:1049–1059.  https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12951 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Pilliod DS, Goldberg CS, Arkle RS et al (2013) Estimating occupancy and abundance of stream amphibians using environmental DNA from filtered water samples. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 70:1123–1130.  https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2013-0047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Plummer M (2003) JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling. Proc Int Workshop Distrib stat Comput 124:125Google Scholar
  11. R Core Team (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  12. Schmidt BR, Kery M, Ursenbacher S et al (2013) Site occupancy models in the analysis of environmental DNA presence/absence surveys: a case study of an emerging amphibian pathogen. Methods Ecol Evol 4:646–653.  https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Slade RW, Moritz C (1998) Phylogeography of Bufo marinus from its natural and introduced ranges. Proc Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 265(1398):769–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smart AS, Weeks AR, van Rooyen AR et al (2015) Environmental DNA sampling is more sensitive than a traditional survey technique for detecting an aquatic invader. Ecol Appl 25:1944–1952CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Spens J, Evans AR, Halfmaerten D et al (2016) Comparison of capture and storage methods for aqueous macrobial eDNA using an optimized extraction protocol: advantage of enclosed filter. Methods Ecol Evol 8:635–645.  https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12683 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Su Y-S, Yajima M (2015) R2jags: using R to Run ‘JAGS’. R package version 0.5-7. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=R2jags
  17. Tingley R, Ward-Fear G, Schwarzkopf L et al (2017) New Weapons in the Toad Toolkit: A review of methods to control and mitigate the biodiversity impacts of invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina). Q Rev Biol 92:123–149.  https://doi.org/10.1086/692167 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Xia Z, Zhan A, Gao Y et al (2018) Early detection of a highly invasive bivalve based on environmental DNA (eDNA). Biol Invasions 20:437–447.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-017-1545-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of BioSciencesUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  2. 2.School of Life and Environmental SciencesUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia
  3. 3.City Planning and Sustainability DivisionBrisbane City CouncilBrisbaneAustralia
  4. 4.cesar Pty LtdParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations