USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

Bridget Ladell

Publications and source records attributed to Bridget Ladell.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Comparison of American Fisheries Society (AFS) standard fish sampling techniques and environmental DNA for characterizing fish communities in a large reservoir

Recently, methods involving examination of environmental DNA (eDNA) have shown promise for characterizing fish species presence and distribution in waterbodies. We evaluated the use of eDNA for standard fish monitoring surveys in a large reservoir. Specifically, we compared the presence, relative abundance, biomass, and relative percent composition of Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides and Gizzard Shad Dorosoma cepedianum measured through eDNA methods and established American Fisheries Society standard sampling methods for Theodore Roosevelt Lake, Arizona. Catches at electrofishing and gillnetting sites were compared with eDNA water samples at sites, within spatial strata, and over the entire reservoir. Gizzard Shad were detected at a higher percentage of sites with eDNA methods than with boat electrofishing in both spring and fall. In contrast, spring and fall gillnetting detected Gizzard Shad at more sites than eDNA. Boat electrofishing and gillnetting detected Largemouth Bass at more sites than eDNA; the exception was fall gillnetting, for which the number of sites of Largemouth Bass detection was equal to that for eDNA. We observed no relationship between relative abundance and biomass of Largemouth Bass and Gizzard Shad measured by established methods and eDNA copies at individual sites or lake sections. Reservoirwide catch composition for Largemouth Bass and Gizzard Shad (numbers and total weight [g] of fish) as determined through a combination of gear types (boat electrofishing plus gillnetting) was similar to the proportion of total eDNA copies from each species in spring and fall field sampling. However, no similarity existed between proportions of fish caught via spring and fall boat electrofishing and the proportion of total eDNA copies from each species. Our study suggests that eDNA field sampling protocols, filtration, DNA extraction, primer design, and DNA sequencing methods need further refinement and testing before incorporation into standard fish sampling surveys.

Arizona

Comparing efficiency of American Fisheries Society standard snorkeling techniques to environmental DNA sampling techniques

Analysis of environmental DNA (eDNA) is an emerging technique used to detect aquatic species through water sampling and the extraction of biological material for amplification. Our study compared the efficacy of eDNA methodology to American Fisheries Society (AFS) standard snorkeling surveys with regard to detecting the presence of rare fish species. Knowing which method is more efficient at detecting target species will help managers to determine the best way to sample when both traditional sampling methods and eDNA sampling are available. Our study site included three Navajo Nation streams that contained Navajo Nation Genetic Subunit Bluehead Suckers Catostomus discobolus and Zuni Bluehead Suckers C. discobolus yarrowi . We first divided the entire wetted area of streams into consecutive 100-m reaches and then systematically selected 10 reaches/stream for snorkel and eDNA surveys. Surface water samples were taken in 10-m sections within each 100-m reach, while fish presence was noted via snorkeling in each 10-m section. Quantitative PCR was run on each individual water sample in quadruplicate to test for the presence or absence of the target species. With eDNA sampling techniques, we were able to positively detect both species in two out of the three streams. Snorkeling resulted in positive detection of both species in all three streams. In streams where the target species were detected with eDNA sampling, snorkeling detected fish at 11–29 sites/stream, whereas eDNA detected fish at 3–12 sites/stream. Our results suggest that AFS standard snorkeling is more effective than eDNA for detecting target fish species. To improve our eDNA procedures, the amount of water collected and tested should be increased. Additionally, filtering water on-site may improve eDNA techniques for detecting fish. Future research should focus on standardization of eDNA sampling to provide a widely operational sampling tool.

Arizona, New Mexico