↓ Skip to main content

Potential of Environmental DNA to Evaluate Northern Pike (Esox lucius) Eradication Efforts: An Experimental Test and Case Study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Potential of Environmental DNA to Evaluate Northern Pike (Esox lucius) Eradication Efforts: An Experimental Test and Case Study
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0162277
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristine J. Dunker, Adam J. Sepulveda, Robert L. Massengill, Jeffrey B. Olsen, Ora L. Russ, John K. Wenburg, Anton Antonovich

Abstract

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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 139 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 19%
Student > Master 26 19%
Other 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 27 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 48 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 19%
Environmental Science 26 19%
Engineering 3 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 1%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 29 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,686,403
of 20,585,116 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#46,486
of 177,664 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,085
of 285,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,088
of 4,071 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,585,116 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 177,664 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 285,090 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,071 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.