Article by: Nur Hidayahanum Hamid

Source: Oregon State University

Scientists at Oregon State University found that environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling is more accurate than electrofishing for detecting fish presence in streams without disturbing the fish. eDNA involves testing water samples for DNA traces left by species, which provides insights into species distribution. The study, comparing eDNA and electrofishing for detecting coastal cutthroat trout, revealed that eDNA detected fish upstream in 40% of cases where electrofishing did not. Although both methods struggle when fish are scarce, eDNA is less disruptive and useful where electrofishing is impractical. However, eDNA lacks the physical data collection that electrofishing provides. The researchers recommend using both methods together to improve accuracy and hope that eDNA becomes more widely adopted as it becomes more accessible.

Picture 1: Delivering a minor electric shock into a stream to reveal any fish lurking nearby may be the gold standard for detecting fish populations, but it's not much fun for the trout (Photo credit: Molly Rosbach).

Picture 2: Brooke Penaluna displaying water samples in the field (Photo credit: Molly Rosbach).

Date of Input: 15/08/2024 | Updated: 16/08/2024 | hidayahanum