Evaluation of Three Monitoring Methods for the Native European Crayfish Austropotamobius torrentium

IF 0.8 Q4 MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY Freshwater Crayfish Pub Date : 2023-12-15 DOI:10.5869/fc.2023.v28-1.1
Samuel Auer, Wolfram Graf, Anne Hartmann, P. Leitner, Daniela Sint, Michale Traugott, Stefan Auer
{"title":"Evaluation of Three Monitoring Methods for the Native European Crayfish Austropotamobius torrentium","authors":"Samuel Auer, Wolfram Graf, Anne Hartmann, P. Leitner, Daniela Sint, Michale Traugott, Stefan Auer","doi":"10.5869/fc.2023.v28-1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n For the stone crayfish, a threatened species listed in the Habitats Directive in Annex II and V, three\nmonitoring methods were evaluated: hand capture by day, hand capture by night and eDNA sampling\nrespectively. The lack of a standardized sampling method in Austria and the simultaneous obligation to\nmonitor and report on the status of protected species requires therefore an evaluation of the different\ntechniques. However, data show that day sampling massively favored the observation of juveniles\nwhereas night sampling obtained higher shares of adults and males. Moreover, organic layer primarily\ndetermines the applicability of hand capturing methods. If the share of organic layer exceeded 40%, night\nsampling was more effective. In brooks with low amount of organic layer, no notable divergences were\nfound. eDNA sampling provided reliable presence-absence data but cannot fully replace hand capturing\nmethods. Data indicate that eDNA detectability depends probably on the discharge level. Below 1.5\nL·s-1 eDNA detection failed but provided reliable results in sections with a higher discharge regime.\nIn summary, all three methods are appropriate for crayfish surveillance programs, but must be applied\naccording to the sampling design appropriate for the research questions and with an awareness of their\nstrengths and weaknesses.","PeriodicalId":29940,"journal":{"name":"Freshwater Crayfish","volume":"118 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Freshwater Crayfish","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5869/fc.2023.v28-1.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For the stone crayfish, a threatened species listed in the Habitats Directive in Annex II and V, three monitoring methods were evaluated: hand capture by day, hand capture by night and eDNA sampling respectively. The lack of a standardized sampling method in Austria and the simultaneous obligation to monitor and report on the status of protected species requires therefore an evaluation of the different techniques. However, data show that day sampling massively favored the observation of juveniles whereas night sampling obtained higher shares of adults and males. Moreover, organic layer primarily determines the applicability of hand capturing methods. If the share of organic layer exceeded 40%, night sampling was more effective. In brooks with low amount of organic layer, no notable divergences were found. eDNA sampling provided reliable presence-absence data but cannot fully replace hand capturing methods. Data indicate that eDNA detectability depends probably on the discharge level. Below 1.5 L·s-1 eDNA detection failed but provided reliable results in sections with a higher discharge regime. In summary, all three methods are appropriate for crayfish surveillance programs, but must be applied according to the sampling design appropriate for the research questions and with an awareness of their strengths and weaknesses.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估针对欧洲本地螯虾 Austropotamobius torrentium 的三种监测方法
石螯虾是《生境指令》附件二和附件五中列出的濒危物种,针对石螯虾评估了三种监测方法:日间人工捕捉、夜间人工捕捉和 eDNA 采样。由于奥地利缺乏标准化的取样方法,同时又有义务对受保护物种的状况进行监测和报告,因此需要对不同的技术进行评估。然而,数据显示,日间取样更有利于观察幼体,而夜间取样则更有利于观察成体和雄体。此外,有机层主要决定了人工捕捉方法的适用性。如果有机层所占比例超过 40%,则夜间取样更为有效。eDNA 采样提供了可靠的存在-不存在数据,但不能完全取代人工捕捉方法。数据表明,eDNA 的可检测性可能取决于排水量。总之,这三种方法都适用于小龙虾监测计划,但必须根据研究问题进行适当的取样设计,并了解其优缺点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Freshwater Crayfish
Freshwater Crayfish MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Upper Thermal Tolerances of Two Native and One Invasive Crayfish in Missouri, USA Stream-Dwelling Crayfishes of the North Fork of the White River Drainage of Missouri, with Additional Notes from Arkansas, USA Recent Range Records of Crayfish (Faxonius) From Far North Ontario, Canada Evaluation of Three Monitoring Methods for the Native European Crayfish Austropotamobius torrentium Thermal Tolerance of the Piedmont Blue Burrower Cambarus harti and Sympatric Native and Invasive Crayfish Species of the Southeastern United States
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1