MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402413872 · doi:10.1002/edn3.70006

Development of <scp>eDNA</scp> Protocols for Detection of Endangered White Sturgeon (<i>Acipenser transmontanus</i>) in the Wild

2024· article· en· W4402413872 on OpenAlexafffund
James A. Crossman, Anne‐Marie Flores, Amber Messmer, R. John Nelson, Steve McAdam, Peter N. Johnson, P. C. Reece, Ben F. Koop

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental DNA · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)Government of British ColumbiaUniversity of British ColumbiaFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of VictoriaBC Hydro (Canada)
FundersMinistry of EnvironmentBC HydroGenome British Columbia
KeywordsSturgeonEndangered speciesAcipenserWhite (mutation)FisheryBiologyZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyHabitatGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Understanding the distribution and habitat use of endangered species is essential for conservation efforts. Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis has become a more common approach to defining species habitat occupancy through identification of residual DNA in water samples and has potential to detect populations that are in low abundance or use habitats over a large geographical range. Here, we optimized an eDNA protocol to detect the presence of the endangered white sturgeon ( Acipenser transmontanus ). We implemented lab‐based experiments to understand the sensitivity and persistence of white sturgeon eDNA and then applied these methods to habitats with known white sturgeon abundances categorized as high, low, or not present. Using quantitative PCR (qPCR) and a modified StrAci1N‐flap primer set, white sturgeon eDNA was detected in water collected from tanks holding white sturgeon down to a dilution of 10,000× (estimated eDNA concentration of 0.00035 μg/L—0.00176 μg/L). Following the removal of white sturgeon from the tanks, the eDNA signal decreased with time but could be detected for up to 7 days. In the field, all sites with high abundances of white sturgeon returned positive eDNA detections. We did not detect white sturgeon eDNA at sites with low abundance or in areas where they were not expected to be present. Results from this work further advance our interpretation of eDNA from wild populations and provide a noninvasive method to advance recovery efforts by identifying species presence in areas of suspected use or to guide additional inventory efforts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental DNASame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207