Summary1. Species detection using environmental DNA (eDNA) has tremendous potential for contributing to the understanding of the ecology and conservation of aquatic species. Detecting species using eDNA methods, rather than directly sampling the organisms, can reduce impacts on sensitive species and increase the power of field surveys for rare and elusive species. The sensitivity of eDNA methods, however, requires a heightened awareness and attention to quality assurance and quality control protocols. Additionally, the interpretation of eDNA data demands careful consideration of multiple factors. As eDNA methods have grown in application, diverse approaches have been implemented to address these issues. With interest in eDNA continuing to expand, supportive guidelines for undertaking eDNA studies are greatly needed. 2. Environmental DNA researchers from around the world have collaborated to produce this set of guidelines and considerations for implementing eDNA methods to detect aquatic macroorganisms. 3. Critical considerations for study design include preventing contamination in the field and the laboratory, choosing appropriate sample analysis methods, validating assays, testing for sample inhibition and following minimum reporting guidelines. Critical considerations for inference include temporal and spatial processes, limits of correlation of eDNA with abundance, uncertainty of positive and negative results, and potential sources of allochthonous DNA. 4. We present a synthesis of knowledge at this stage for application of this new and powerful detection method.

Environmental DNA (eDNA) methods for detecting aquatic species are advancing rapidly, but with little evaluation of field protocols or precision of resulting estimates. We compared sampling results from traditional field methods with eDNA methods for two amphibians in 13 streams in central Idaho, USA. We also evaluated three water collection protocols and the influence of sampling location, time of day, and distance from animals on eDNA concentration in the water. We found no difference in detection or amount of eDNA among water collection protocols. eDNA methods had slightly higher detection rates than traditional field methods, particularly when species occurred at low densities. eDNA concentration was positively related to field-measured density, biomass, and proportion of transects occupied. Precision of eDNA-based abundance estimates increased with the amount of eDNA in the water and the number of replicate subsamples collected. eDNA concentration did not vary significantly with sample location in the stream, time of day, or distance downstream from animals. Our results further advance the implementation of eDNA methods for monitoring aquatic vertebrates in stream habitats.

Environmental DNA (eDNA) methods for detecting and estimating abundance of aquatic species are emerging rapidly, but little is known about how processes such as secretion rate, environmental degradation, and time since colonization or extirpation from a given site affect eDNA measurements. Using stream-dwelling salamanders and quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis, we conducted three experiments to assess eDNA: (i) production rate; (ii) persistence time under different temperature and light conditions; and (iii) detectability and concentration through time following experimental introduction and removal of salamanders into previously unoccupied streams. We found that 44-50 g individuals held in aquaria produced 77 ng eDNA/h for 2 h, after which production either slowed considerably or began to equilibrate with degradation. eDNA in both full-sun and shaded treatments degraded exponentially to <1% of the original concentration after 3 days. eDNA was no longer detectable in full-sun samples after 8 days, whereas eDNA was detected in 20% of shaded samples after 11 days and 100% of refrigerated control samples after 18 days. When translocated into unoccupied streams, salamanders were detectable after 6 h, but only when densities were relatively high (0.2481 individuals/m(2) ) and when samples were collected within 5 m of the animals. Concentrations of eDNA detected were very low and increased steadily from 6-24 h after introduction, reaching 0.0022 ng/L. Within 1 h of removing salamanders from the stream, eDNA was no longer detectable. These results suggest that eDNA detectability and concentration depend on production rates of individuals, environmental conditions, density of animals, and their residence time.

Stream ecosystems harbor many secretive and imperiled species, and studies of vertebrates in these systems face the challenges of relatively low detection rates and high costs. Environmental DNA (eDNA) has recently been confirmed as a sensitive and efficient tool for documenting aquatic vertebrates in wetlands and in a large river and canal system. However, it was unclear whether this tool could be used to detect low-density vertebrates in fast-moving streams where shed cells may travel rapidly away from their source. To evaluate the potential utility of eDNA techniques in stream systems, we designed targeted primers to amplify a short, species-specific DNA fragment for two secretive stream amphibian species in the northwestern region of the United States (Rocky Mountain tailed frogs, Ascaphus montanus, and Idaho giant salamanders, Dicamptodon aterrimus). We tested three DNA extraction and five PCR protocols to determine whether we could detect eDNA of these species in filtered water samples from five streams with varying densities of these species in central Idaho, USA. We successfully amplified and sequenced the targeted DNA regions for both species from stream water filter samples. We detected Idaho giant salamanders in all samples and Rocky Mountain tailed frogs in four of five streams and found some indication that these species are more difficult to detect using eDNA in early spring than in early fall. While the sensitivity of this method across taxa remains to be determined, the use of eDNA could revolutionize surveys for rare and invasive stream species. With this study, the utility of eDNA techniques for detecting aquatic vertebrates has been demonstrated across the majority of freshwater systems, setting the stage for an innovative transformation in approaches for aquatic research.

Landscape features such as mountains, rivers, and ecological gradients may strongly affect patterns of dispersal and gene flow among populations and thereby shape population dynamics and evolutionary trajectories. The landscape may have a particularly strong effect on patterns of dispersal and gene flow in amphibians because amphibians are thought to have poor dispersal abilities. We examined genetic variation at six microsatellite loci in Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) from 28 breeding ponds in western Montana and Idaho, USA, in order to investigate the effects of landscape structure on patterns of gene flow. We were particularly interested in addressing three questions: (i) do ridges act as barriers to gene flow? (ii) is gene flow restricted between low and high elevation ponds? (iii) does a pond equal a 'randomly mating population' (a deme)? We found that mountain ridges and elevational differences were associated with increased genetic differentiation among sites, suggesting that gene flow is restricted by ridges and elevation in this species. We also found that populations of Columbia spotted frogs generally include more than a single pond except for very isolated ponds. There was also evidence for surprisingly high levels of gene flow among low elevation sites separated by large distances. Moreover, genetic variation within populations was strongly negatively correlated with elevation, suggesting effective population sizes are much smaller at high elevation than at low elevation. Our results show that landscape features have a profound effect on patterns of genetic variation in Columbia spotted frogs.