Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBroadhurst, Holly A
dc.contributor.authorGregory, Luke M
dc.contributor.authorBleakley, Emma K
dc.contributor.authorPerkins, Joseph C
dc.contributor.authorLavin, Jenna V
dc.contributor.authorBolton, Polly
dc.contributor.authorBrowett, Samuel S
dc.contributor.authorHowe, Claire V
dc.contributor.authorSingleton, Natalie
dc.contributor.authorTansley, Darren
dc.contributor.authorSales, Naiara Guimarães
dc.contributor.authorMcDevitt, Allan D; email: a.mcdevitt@salford.ac.uk
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-15T00:43:37Z
dc.date.available2021-09-15T00:43:37Z
dc.date.issued2021-08-18
dc.date.submitted2021-06-11
dc.identifierpubmed: 34467903
dc.identifierpii: S0048-9697(21)04799-9
dc.identifierdoi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149724
dc.identifier.citationThe Science of the total environment, volume 801, page 149724
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10034/625860
dc.descriptionFrom PubMed via Jisc Publications Router
dc.descriptionHistory: received 2021-06-11, revised 2021-08-12, accepted 2021-08-13
dc.descriptionPublication status: aheadofprint
dc.description.abstractFinding more efficient ways to monitor and estimate the diversity of mammalian communities is a major step towards their management and conservation. Environmental DNA (eDNA) from river water has recently been shown to be a viable method for biomonitoring mammalian communities. Most of the studies to date have focused on the potential for eDNA to detect individual species, with little focus on describing patterns of community diversity and structure. Here, we first focus on the sampling effort required to reliably map the diversity and distribution of semi-aquatic and terrestrial mammals and allow inferences of community structure surrounding two rivers in southeastern England. Community diversity and composition was then assessed based on species richness and β-diversity, with differences between communities partitioned into nestedness and turnover, and the sampling effort required to rapidly detect semi-aquatic and terrestrial species was evaluated based on species accumulation curves and occupancy modelling. eDNA metabarcoding detected 25 wild mammal species from five orders, representing the vast majority (82%) of the species expected in the area. The required sampling effort varied between orders, with common species (generally rodents, deer and lagomorphs) more readily detected, with carnivores detected less frequently. Measures of species richness differed between rivers (both overall and within each mammalian order) and patterns of β-diversity revealed the importance of species replacement in sites within each river, against a pattern of species loss between the two rivers. eDNA metabarcoding demonstrated its capability to rapidly detect mammal species, allowing inferences of community composition that will better inform future sampling strategies for this Class. Importantly, this study highlights the potential use of eDNA data for investigating mammalian community dynamics over different spatial scales. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.]
dc.languageeng
dc.sourceeissn: 1879-1026
dc.subjectOccupancy modelling
dc.subjecteDNA metabarcoding
dc.subjectCommunity
dc.subjectTerrestrial
dc.subjectSemi-aquatic
dc.subjectMammals
dc.titleMapping differences in mammalian distributions and diversity using environmental DNA from rivers.
dc.typearticle
dc.date.updated2021-09-15T00:43:37Z
dc.date.accepted2021-08-13


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record