Unveiling invasive insect threats to plant biodiversity: Leveraging eDNA metabarcoding and saturated salt trap solutions for biosurveillance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The negative global impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) on biodiversity are second only to habitat loss. eDNA metabarcoding allows for a faster and more comprehensive evaluation of community species composition, with a higher taxonomic resolution and less taxonomic expertise required than traditional morphological-based biosurveillance. These advantages have positioned eDNA metabarcoding as the standard method for molecular-based detection of invasive alien species, where fast and accurate detectability allows prompt responses to mitigate their adverse effects. Here, eDNA metabarcoding is used for biosurveillance of invasive alien species regulated by Canada in high-risk areas with four main objectives: i) validate the effectiveness of eDNA metabarcoding of salt trap solutions as a molecular technique for IAS detection, ii) compare detection from DNA extracts obtained from filter quarters versus whole filters, iii) benchmark two different bioinformatic pipelines (MetaWorks and mBRAVE), and iv) compare canopy and ground level trapping. eDNA from up to five IAS (Agrilus planipennis, Daktulosphaira vitifoliae, Lymantria dispar, Popillia japonica, and Trichoferus campestris) were successfully detected across years from 2017 to 2022 in southern Ontario, Canada, with successful morphological validation for all except Lymantria dispar and Trichoferus campestris. Analysis of filter quarters in contrast to whole filters was demonstrated to be insufficient for effective IAS detection in each sample. All IAS were detected in only one filter quarter, suggesting a patchy eDNA distribution on the filter. The MetaWorks and mBRAVE bioinformatics pipelines proved effective in identifying IAS, with MetaWorks yielding a higher success rate when comparing molecular and morphological identifications. Ground-level and canopy-level sampling showed differential IAS recovery rates based on the molecular detection, which also varied per collection year, with all found IAS detected at the canopy level in 2022 while only one (Lymantria dispar) in 2020. The present study ratifies the efficacy and importance of eDNA-based detection in a regulatory context and the utility of adding eDNA metabarcoding of saturated salt trap solutions, a critical tool for IAS detection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".