Geology topics

Robert L. Massengill

Publications and source records attributed to Robert L. Massengill.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2018

Tradeoffs of a portable, field-based environmental DNA platform for detecting invasive northern pike (Esox lucius) in Alaska

Environmental DNA (eDNA) has improved detection probabilities of aquatic invasive species but lab-based analytical platforms for eDNA analyses slow opportunities for rapid response. Effective approaches that address this analytical bottleneck and improve capacity for rapid response are urgently needed. We tested the sensitivity of a portable, field-based eDNA platform relative to widely used lab-based eDNA approaches for detecting invasive northern pike (Esox lucius) in eight lakes on Alaska’s Kenai Peninsula. The portable, field-based platform takes ~ 1 hr from sample collection to final results and uses a field-based DNA extraction kit, a shelf-stable assay, and a portable real-time PCR thermocycler. Lab-based approaches take days to weeks to months for final results and use lab-based DNA extraction kits, lab-bound assays, and benchtop real-time thermocyclers. We found that the portable, field-based approach was less sensitive than lab-based approaches and was more prone to inhibition, thus increasing potential for false-negatives. Until sensitivity and inhibition issues can be resolved, this portable, field-based approach is best viewed as a complement to rather than a replacement of standard eDNA lab-based approaches.

Alaska↗

USGS2018

The northern pike, a prized native but disastrous invasive: Chapter 14

As the chapters in this book describe, the northern pike Esox lucius Linneaus, 1758 is a fascinating fish that plays an important ecological role in structuring aquatic communities (chapter 8), has the capacity to aid lake restoration efforts (chapter 11), and contributes substantially to local economies, both as a highlysought after sport fish (chapter 12) and as a commercial fishing resource (chapter 13). However, despite the magnificent attributes of this fish, there is another side to its story. Specifically, what happens when northern pike, a highly efficient predator, becomes established outside its natural range? To explore this question, this chapter will investigate observed consequences from many locations where northern pike (hereafter referred to as “pike”) have been introduced and discuss potential reasons why pike, under the right circumstances, can be considered an invasive species.

Book chapter↗

USGS2016

Potential of environmental DNA to evaluate Northern pike ( Esox lucius ) eradication efforts: An experimental test and case study

Determining the success of invasive species eradication efforts is challenging because populations at very low abundance are difficult to detect. Environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling has recently emerged as a powerful tool for detecting rare aquatic animals; however, detectable fragments of DNA can persist over time despite absence of the targeted taxa and can therefore complicate eDNA sampling after an eradication event. This complication is a large concern for fish eradication efforts in lakes since killed fish can sink to the bottom and slowly decay. DNA released from these carcasses may remain detectable for long periods. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of eDNA sampling to detect invasive Northern pike ( Esox lucius ) following piscicide eradication efforts in southcentral Alaskan lakes. We used field observations and experiments to test the sensitivity of our Northern pike eDNA assay and to evaluate the persistence of detectable DNA emitted from Northern pike carcasses. We then used eDNA sampling and traditional sampling (i.e., gillnets) to test for presence of Northern pike in four lakes subjected to a piscicide-treatment designed to eradicate this species. We found that our assay could detect an abundant, free-roaming population of Northern pike and could also detect low-densities of Northern pike held in cages. For these caged Northern pike, probability of detection decreased with distance from the cage. We then stocked three lakes with Northern pike carcasses and collected eDNA samples 7, 35 and 70 days post-stocking. We detected DNA at 7 and 35 days, but not at 70 days. Finally, we collected eDNA samples ~ 230 days after four lakes were subjected to piscicide-treatments and detected Northern pike DNA in 3 of 179 samples, with a single detection at each of three lakes, though we did not catch any Northern pike in gillnets. Taken together, we found that eDNA can help to inform eradication efforts if used in conjunction with multiple lines of inquiry and sampling is delayed long enough to allow full degradation of DNA in the water.

PLoS ONE↗