Geology topics

Rodney T. Richardson

Publications and source records attributed to Rodney T. Richardson.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Sensitive environmental DNA methods for low-risk surveillance of at-risk bumble bees

Terrestrial environmental DNA (eDNA) techniques have been proposed as a means of sensitive, non-lethal pollinator monitoring. To date, however, no studies have provided evidence that eDNA methods can achieve detection sensitivity on par with traditional pollinator surveys. Using a large-scale dataset of eDNA and corresponding net surveys, we show that eDNA methods enable sensitive, species-level characterisation of whole bumble bee communities, including rare and critically endangered species such as the rusty patched bumble bee (RPBB; Bombus affinis ). All species present in netting surveys were detected within eDNA surveys, apart from two rare species in the socially parasitic subgenus Psithyrus (cuckoo bumble bees). Further, for rare non-parasitic species, eDNA methods exhibited similar sensitivity relative to traditional netting. Compared with flower eDNA samples, sequenced leaf surface eDNA samples resulted in significantly lower rates of Bombus detection, and these detections were likely attributable to high rates of background eDNA on environmental surfaces, perhaps due to airborne eDNA or eDNA movement during rainfall events. Lastly, we found that eDNA-based frequency of detection across replicate surveys was strongly associated with net-based measures of abundance across site visits. We conclude that the COI-based metabarcoding method we present is cost-effective and highly scalable for quantitative characterisation of at-risk bumble bee communities, providing a new approach for improving our understanding of species habitat associations.

Central Appalachian Mountains↗

USGS2025

Scalable environmental DNA methods reveal strong associations between landscape-scale forest habitat and insect richness

While aquatic environmental DNA (eDNA) methods have reached relative maturity, terrestrial eDNA methods are nascent and have yet to reach widespread use. Field-ready applications require eDNA survey methods where samples are easy to collect by inexperienced practitioners, easy to transport between the field and lab, and easy to process thereafter. Here, we demonstrate methods that satisfy these requirements and show strong potential for characterizing diverse terrestrial eDNA samples collected from flower and leaf surfaces. We used novel methods to collect and process 236 flower eDNA samples and 21 leaf surface eDNA samples, obtaining 2,228 Arthropoda eDNA detections spanning 175 families using amplicon sequencing of two genetic markers. Detected taxa were diverse and included numerous groups of conservation concern, such as bees (Hymenoptera; Anthophila, 32 genera spanning 5 families) and Lepidoptera (209 genera from 21 families). Data reveal strong associations between insect community richness and remotely sensed measures of forest habitat, providing a quantitative perspective of relevance to insect conservation. It is increasingly clear that a variety of organisms readily disperse eDNA throughout the environment, supporting the notion that eDNA will be a powerful tool for characterizing species distributions and monitoring at-risk species. However, we conclude that researchers seeking to characterize fine-scale habitat associations or plant-pollinator interactions using eDNA will need to carefully design studies with appropriate field controls, such as the leaf surface eDNA samples collected here.

BioRxiv↗

USGS2025

Sensitive environmental DNA methods for low-risk surveillance of at-risk bumble bees

Terrestrial environmental DNA (eDNA) techniques have been proposed as a means of sensitive, non-lethal pollinator monitoring. To date, however, no studies have provided evidence that eDNA methods can achieve detection densities on par with traditional pollinator surveys. Using a large-scale dataset of eDNA and corresponding net surveys, we show that eDNA methods enable sensitive, species-level characterization of whole bumble bee communities, including rare and critically endangered species such as the rusty pathed bumble bee (RPBB; Bombus affinis ). All species present in netting surveys were detected within eDNA surveys, apart from two rare species in the socially parasitic subgenus Psithyrus (cuckoo bumble bees). Further, for rare non-parasitic species, eDNA methods exhibited similar sensitivity relative to traditional netting. Relative to flower eDNA samples, sequenced field negative controls resulted in significantly lower rates of Bombus detection, and these detections were likely attributable to high rates of background eDNA on environmental surfaces. Lastly, we found that eDNA-based frequency of detection across replicate surveys was strongly associated with net-based measures of abundance across site visits. We conclude that the method is cost-effective and highly scalable for semi-quantitative characterization of at-risk bumble bee communities, providing a new approach for improving our understanding of species habitat associations.

BioRxiv↗

USGS2024

Autonomous samplers and environmental DNA metabarcoding: Sampling day and primer choice have greatest impact on fish detection probabilities

Unprecedented rates of biodiversity loss and ecosystem function necessitate the use of rapid, efficacious, and cost-effective biomonitoring tools. The combination of autonomous samplers and high throughput sequencing (i.e., “metabarcoding”) of environmental DNA ( eDNA ) samples enables characterization of entire communities at high frequency and can be an important tool for conservation and management, allowing researchers to track fluctuations in biodiversity. We deployed two autonomous samplers at two U.S. Geological Survey streamgage sites in the upper Snake River (Wyoming and Idaho, USA) to collect eDNA samples from July-September 2021 and 2022 to characterize fish diversity. We used a probabilistic approach to evaluate the effects of water temperature, water discharge, filter pore size, water volume filtered, number of samples collected, timing, and primers on the probability of detecting eDNA from fish species known to be present. We detected eDNA from 13/15 species present in these areas of the Snake River. Overall, we did not find evidence that filter pore size, water volume filtered, water discharge, and water temperature affected the probability of detecting fish species’ eDNA . By contrast, primers and sampling day affected fish detection probabilities, indicating that primer choice and sampling day can either over- or under- estimate species diversity. These results indicate that users would ideally consider sampling on non-consecutive days and which primer set will maximize species detections.

Metabarcoding & Metagenomics↗

USGS2023

Prospects of pollinator community surveillance using terrestrial environmental DNA metagenetics

Current pollinator survey methods exhibit bias, require highly-trained practitioners, and are difficult to scale to large sample sizes. High-throughput sequencing of terrestrial eDNA could provide a complementary tool for studying pollinator communities, but eDNA methods have not been extensively evaluated. We conducted metagenetic analysis of whole arthropod community eDNA from 20 flower and seven honey bee-collected pollen samples and compared eDNA-derived data with traditional netting-based surveys of the pollinator communities present during sampling. We focused our analysis on Anthophila (bees) and detected eight bee genera belonging to four families across COI, 16S, and 28S markers. Results varied considerably by marker and eDNA substrate. Detected bee genera were plausible for the study system and about 43 percent of total bee genera were detected with both eDNA and net-based surveys, though netting resulted in more detections across a wider diversity of genera. Data from sequenced controls suggest that eDNA identifications were unlikely to have resulted from cross-contamination. Our results demonstrate that bee communities can be documented with eDNA techniques and that the choice of marker and substrate substantially influences detection. Future improvements to our methods are required, but eDNA surveys appear well-suited to characterize diverse pollinator communities and provide novel sampling perspectives within plant-pollinator networks. Future efforts should focus on improving the selection of markers available for pollinator eDNA metagenetics, addressing taxonomic gaps within reference sequence databases and optimizing sampling and eDNA isolation protocols. We anticipate that such improvements are highly feasible and that eDNA will be a useful tool to those who study pollinators and plant-pollinator interactions.

Environmental DNA↗