Comparative Cost and Effort of Fish Distribution Detection via Environmental DNA Analysis and Electrofishing

By Nathan T. Evans, Patrick D. Shirey, J. Wieringa, A. Mahon, G. Lamberti. 2017

221 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Molecular Biology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8a75709bacb0e8192af5e46f180b554b527d315b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. A. Suarez
2. E. Larson
3. L. Lawson Handley
4. B. Hänfling

In Molecular Biology

1. L. Lawson Handley
2. B. Hänfling

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. A. Suarez
2. L. Lawson Handley
3. B. Hänfling

Citations in the corpus

• From eDNA to citizen science: emerging tools for the early detection of invasive species (2020, background): “It may be cost effective relative to many conventional approaches (Evans et al. 2017), and the simplicity of sample collection makes it an appealing tool for citizen scientists (Larson et al.”
• Read counts from environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding reflect fish abundance and biomass in drained ponds (2020, background): “In small, shallow lentic systems eDNA is thought to be homogeneously distributed in the water (Thomsen et al., 2012; Evans et al., 2017) even though the signal strength may increase closer to its source (Li et al., 2019b).”