Data and code from: Drivers behind spatiotemporal variation in environmental DNA: An assessment using a rare aquatic salamander, the Eastern Hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis alleganiensis)
Data files
Mar 03, 2026 version files 44.85 MB
-
conc_hist.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
6.13 MB
-
conc13.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
6.15 MB
-
conc22.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
6.12 MB
-
detect13_offset.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
8.73 MB
-
detect22_offset.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
8.80 MB
-
detecthist_offset.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
8.76 MB
-
DetectionRates_22sites.csv
3.61 KB
-
Dryad_RScript_Spatiotemporal_eDNA_Variation.R
86.34 KB
-
eDNA_Concentrations_PCRreps_22sites.csv
29.68 KB
-
log_regression.csv
2.08 KB
-
README.md
22.34 KB
-
WaterChem_13sites.csv
4.61 KB
-
WaterChem_22sites.csv
3.96 KB
-
WaterChem_historicsites.csv
5.35 KB
-
WaterChem_PosteriorDistributions_Concentrations.csv
1.26 KB
-
WaterChem_PosteriorDistributions_Detections.csv
1.13 KB
Abstract
Environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling has become a common tool for monitoring rare and declining aquatic species. However, results can be biased by the spatiotemporal variation in eDNA signals, yet the biological and environmental factors that cause this variation are not well understood. Here, we examined the seasonal and fine-scale (< 100 m) longitudinal variation in eDNA concentration and detection in situ for a rare aquatic salamander, the Eastern Hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis alleganiensis). We also applied multivariate generalized linear mixed-effects models to investigate how physical and hydrological stream characteristics influence eDNA concentration estimates and detection rates. Both metrics spiked during the hellbender breeding season, but remained low at other times of the year. This was primarily driven by one site in which hellbenders are dense and actively reproducing; once this site was removed from analyses, temporal variation in eDNA signals was no longer observed. No fine-scale spatial eDNA pattern emerged, but concentrations and detections were highly variable across temporal and spatial replicates within sites, emphasizing the importance of collecting replicate eDNA samples at multiple scales. Only PCR inhibitors present in our samples significantly reduced concentrations and detections; however, general negative relationships were still apparent with flow velocity. Increased surface water temperature and pH were also tenuously associated with eDNA concentrations but did not influence detections. Our study contributes important knowledge regarding biological and environmental factors driving eDNA spatiotemporal variability, facilitating a refinement in eDNA sampling strategies for hellbenders and other rare aquatic organisms so that accurate scientific inferences about their populations can be made.
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.tx95x6b7m
Description of the data and file structure
This dataset contains the data and R code required to replicate analyses in Tomke and Price to assess the spatiotemporal variation in environmental DNA concentrations and detection rates in situ for a large, rare aquatic salamander, the Eastern Hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis alleganiensis). Environmental DNA concentrations and detection rates were derived from spatial and temporal eDNA replicates collected from 90 sites across Kentucky, USA, during 2019-2021. Water chemistry and hydrology information were collected during each site visit, including seasonal sampling periods. Twenty-two sites had positive detections within at least one sample; these data were used in this study. eDNA samples were filtered in the lab < 10 hours after being collected from the field and frozen at -20 °C (without buffer) until DNA extraction was performed. Qiagen DNeasy Blood & Tissue kits with the addition of a Qiagen Qiashredder spin column were used to extraction DNA from filters (Spear et al. 2015). Samples were analyzed by using 9 qPCR replicates per sample. eDNA concentration was estimated within QuantStudio Design and Analysis Software based on 10x-fold standard curves. Detection counts were calculated as the number of qPCR replicates that amplified out of 9 total technical replicates. The spatiotemporal variation of eDNA concentrations and detection rates were assesses by using a linear mixed effects model and generalized linear mixed effects model, respectively. Bayesian MCMC generalized linear mixed models were used to investigate the effect of various environmental covariates on both metrics. Lastly, the relationship between concentrations and detection rates were analyzed via a self-starting non-linear least squares logistic model.
Files and variables
File: eDNA_Concentrations_PCRreps_22sites.csv
Description: Environmental DNA concentrations for 22 sites positive for hellbender eDNA. Samples were processed using 9 qPCR replicates. All technical replicates are reported, even qPCR wells that did not amplify.
Variables
- site: Abbreviations for sites sampled for Eastern Hellbender eDNA
- qPCR_rep: Samples were processed using 9 qPCR replicate
- spatial_rep: Spatial eDNA replicate collected at three different locations within the stream: 1 = sampled directly downstream of best-available hellbender habitat; 2 = sampled 50 meters downstream of Replicate 1; 3 = sampled 50 meters downstream of Replicate 2
- season: Temporal eDNA replicate collected at during three different seasons: Breeding = hellbender breeding season (August--mid-October); Hatching = egg hatching season (Late October--November); Pre-Breeding = hellbender pre-breeding season (June)
- qs_conc: Environmental DNA concentration (pg/uL) estimated in QuantStudio Design & Analysis Software based on 10x-fold dilution standard curves
- trip: Dichotomous variable indicating if the site is the positive field control site: "no" - site is not the positive field control site; "yes" - site is the positive field control site
File: DetectionRates_22sites.csv
Description: Environmental DNA detection rates for 22 sites positive for hellbender eDNA. Samples were processed using 9 qPCR replicates. Detection rates for each spatial and temporal eDNA replicate collected from each site are presented.
Variables
- site: Abbreviations for sites sampled for Eastern Hellbender eDNA
- spatial_rep: Spatial eDNA replicate collected at three different locations within the stream: 1 = sampled directly downstream of best-available hellbender habitat; 2 = sampled 50 meters downstream of Replicate 1; 3 = sampled 50 meters downstream of Replicate 2
- season: Temporal eDNA replicate collected at during three different seasons: Breeding = hellbender breeding season (August--mid-October); Hatching = egg hatching season (Late October--November); Pre-Breeding = hellbender pre-breeding season (June)
- detect_rate: Detection rate of eDNA amplification within 9 qPCR replicates. Ranges from 0-1.
- detect_count: Number of qPCR replicates that amplified for hellbender eDNA out of 9 technical replicates. Ranges from 0-9.
- conc_avg: Environmental DNA concentration (pg/uL) estimated in QuantStudio Design & Analysis Software based on 10x-fold dilution standard curves, averaged across the 9 qPCR replicates
File: WaterChem_13sites.csv
Description: Water chemistry and hydrology data collected from 13 sites that were sampled during 3 different seasons and at 3 spatial replicates each season.
Variables
- site: Abbreviations for sites sampled for Eastern Hellbender eDNA
- season: Temporal eDNA replicate collected at during three different seasons: Breeding = hellbender breeding season (August--mid-October); Hatching = egg hatching season (Late October--November); Pre-Breeding = hellbender pre-breeding season (June)
- conc: Environmental DNA concentration (pg/uL) estimated in QuantStudio Design & Analysis Software based on 10x-fold dilution standard curves
- detect_rates: Proportion of qPCR replicates that amplified for hellbender eDNA out of 27 technical replicates (spatial replicates were combined for this dataset)
- detect_counts: Number of qPCR replicates that amplified for hellbender eDNA out of 27 technical replicates. Ranges from 0-27 (spatial replicates were combined for this dataset)
- qprc_reps: Number of qPCR replicates used to process samples collected during each season
- cond: Conductivity of water sample (umohs/L)
- toc: Level of Total Organic Carbon in water sample (mg/L C)
- turb: Turbidity of water sample (NTU)
- flow: Flow velocity of water (m/s) based on a standardized flow method. Flow velocity was estimated three times at each spatial replicate and averaged to obtain a single estimate for flow during each season.
- temp: Surface temperature of water (°C)
- pH: pH of water (H+)
- so4: Level of sulfate in water sample (mg/L)
- no3n: Level of nitrate nitrogen in water sample (mg/L)
- po4: Level of phosphate in water sample (mg/L)
- mn: Level of manganese in water sample (mg/L)
- cl: Level of chloride in water sample (mg/L)
- no2n: Level of nitrite nitrogen in water sample (mg/L)
- fl: Level of fluoride in water sample (mg/L)
- mg: Level of magnesium in water sample (mg/L)
- na: Level of sodium in water sample (mg/L)
- k: Level of potassium in water sample (mg/L)
- fe: Level of iron in water sample (mg/L)
- ca: Level of calcium in water sample (mg/L)
File: WaterChem_22sites.csv
Description: Water chemistry and hydrology data collected from 22 sites that were positive for hellbender eDNA
Variables
- site: Abbreviations for sites sampled for Eastern Hellbender eDNA
- season: Temporal eDNA replicate collected at during three different seasons: Breeding = hellbender breeding season (August--mid-October); Hatching = egg hatching season (Late October--November); Pre-Breeding = hellbender pre-breeding season (June)
- conc: Environmental DNA concentration (pg/uL) estimated in QuantStudio Design & Analysis Software based on 10x-fold dilution standard curves
- detect_rates: Proportion of qPCR replicates that amplified for hellbender eDNA out of all technical replicates (spatial replicates were combined for this dataset)
- detect_counts: Number of qPCR replicates that amplified for hellbender eDNA out of all technical replicates. Ranges from 0-27 (spatial replicates were combined for this dataset)
- qprc_reps: Number of qPCR replicates used to process samples collected during each season. Sites with 1 spatial replicate had 9 qPCR replicates total; sites with 3 spatial replicates had 27 qPCR replicates total.
- cond: Conductivity of water sample (umohs/L)
- toc: Level of Total Organic Carbon in water sample (mg/L C)
- turb: Turbidity of water sample (NTU)
- flow: Flow velocity of water (m/s) based on a standardized flow method. Flow velocity was estimated three times at each spatial replicate and averaged to obtain a single estimate for flow during each season.
- temp: Surface temperature of water (°C)
- pH: pH of water (H+)
File: WaterChem_historicsites.csv
Description: Water chemistry and hydrology data collected from 22 sites that were positive for hellbender eDNA
Variables
- site: Abbreviations for sites sampled for Eastern Hellbender eDNA
- season: Temporal eDNA replicate collected at during three different seasons: Breeding = hellbender breeding season (August--mid-October); Hatching = egg hatching season (Late October--November); Pre-Breeding = hellbender pre-breeding season (June)
- conc: Environmental DNA concentration (pg/uL) estimated in QuantStudio Design & Analysis Software based on 10x-fold dilution standard curves
- detect_rates: Proportion of qPCR replicates that amplified for hellbender eDNA out of all technical replicates (spatial replicates were combined for this dataset)
- detect_counts: Number of qPCR replicates that amplified for hellbender eDNA out of all technical replicates. Ranges from 0-27 (spatial replicates were combined for this dataset)
- qprc_reps: Number of qPCR replicates used to process samples collected during each season. Sites with 1 spatial replicate had 9 qPCR replicates total; sites with 3 spatial replicates had 27 qPCR replicates total.
- cond: Conductivity of water sample (umohs/L)
- toc: Level of Total Organic Carbon in water sample (mg/L C)
- turb: Turbidity of water sample (NTU)
- flow: Flow velocity of water (m/s) based on a standardized flow method. Flow velocity was estimated three times at each spatial replicate and averaged to obtain a single estimate for flow during each season.
- temp: Surface temperature of water (°C)
- pH: pH of water (H+)
File: conc13.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
Description: MCMC array created from running a generalized linear mixed model using Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling to detemine the effect of water chemistry and hydrology covariates on eDNA concentrations. The model included 13 sites that were sampled for eDNA at 3 seasons and at 3 spatial replicates. The model was run using a gaussian distribution with 600,000 MCMC iterations and a 100,000 burn-in.
Variables
- (Intercept): Posterior distribution estimates for the model intercept
- toc.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for the level of Total Organic Carbon at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- turb.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for turbidity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- pH.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for pH at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- cond.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for conductivity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- flow.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for flow velocity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- temp.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for surface water temperature at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
File: conc22.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
Description: MCMC array created from running a generalized linear mixed model using Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling to detemine the effect of water chemistry and hydrology covariates on eDNA concentrations. The model included 18 sites that were positive for hellbender eDNA. The model was run using a gaussian distribution with 600,000 MCMC iterations and a 100,000 burn-in.
Variables
- (Intercept): Posterior distribution estimates for the model intercept
- toc.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for the level of Total Organic Carbon at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- turb.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for turbidity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- pH.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for pH at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- cond.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for conductivity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- flow.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for flow velocity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- temp.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for surface water temperature at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
File: conc_hist.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
Description: MCMC array created from running a generalized linear mixed model using Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling to detemine the effect of water chemistry and hydrology covariates on eDNA concentrations. The model included 28 sites, 18 that were positive for hellbender eDNA and 10 sites that were negative for hellbender eDNA but had historic records of them at the site within the past 50 years. The model was run using a gaussian distribution with 600,000 MCMC iterations and a 100,000 burn-in.
Variables
- (Intercept): Posterior distribution estimates for the model intercept
- toc.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for the level of Total Organic Carbon at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- turb.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for turbidity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- pH.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for pH at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- cond.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for conductivity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- flow.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for flow velocity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- temp.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for surface water temperature at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
File: detect13_offset.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
Description: MCMC array created from running a generalized linear mixed model using Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling to detemine the effect of water chemistry and hydrology covariates on eDNA detection rates. The model included 13 sites that were sampled for eDNA at 3 seasons and at 3 spatial replicates. The model was run using a poisson distribution with 700,000 MCMC iterations and a 100,000 burn-in.
Variables
- (Intercept): Posterior distribution estimates for the model intercept
- toc.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for the level of Total Organic Carbon at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- turb.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for turbidity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- pH.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for pH at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- cond.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for conductivity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- flow.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for flow velocity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- temp.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for surface water temperature at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- log(qpcr_reps): Posterior distribution estimates for log of number of qPCR replicates used to process eDNA samples at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
File: detect22_offset.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
Description: MCMC array created from running a generalized linear mixed model using Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling to detemine the effect of water chemistry and hydrology covariates on eDNA detection rates. The model included 18 sites that were positive for hellbender eDNA. The model was run using a poisson distribution with 700,000 MCMC iterations and a 100,000 burn-in.
Variables
- (Intercept): Posterior distribution estimates for the model intercept
- toc.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for the level of Total Organic Carbon at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- turb.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for turbidity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- pH.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for pH at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- cond.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for conductivity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- flow.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for flow velocity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- temp.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for surface water temperature at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- log(qpcr_reps): Posterior distribution estimates for log of number of qPCR replicates used to process eDNA samples at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
File: detecthist_offset.posterior.dist_mcmc.csv
Description: MCMC array created from running a generalized linear mixed model using Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling to detemine the effect of water chemistry and hydrology covariates on eDNA detection rates. The model included 28 sites, 18 that were positive for hellbender eDNA and 10 sites that were negative for hellbender eDNA but had historic records of them at the site within the past 50 years. The model was run using a poisson distribution with 700,000 MCMC iterations and a 100,000 burn-in.
Variables
- (Intercept): Posterior distribution estimates for the model intercept
- toc.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for the level of Total Organic Carbon at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- turb.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for turbidity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- pH.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for pH at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- cond.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for conductivity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- flow.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for flow velocity at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- temp.sc: Posterior distribution estimates for surface water temperature at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
- log(qpcr_reps): Posterior distribution estimates for log of number of qPCR replicates used to process eDNA samples at each site, scaled to have a mean of 0 and a standardized deviation of 1
File: log_regression.csv
Description: eDNA concentration and detection rates for samples collected during each season (i.e. temporal replicates) at each site. Concentrations were averaged across the three spatial replicates to produce a single estimate for each season. Detection rates were calculated from 27 qPCR replicates.
Variables
- site: Abbreviations for sites sampled for Eastern Hellbender eDNA
- season: Temporal eDNA replicate collected at during three different seasons: Breeding = hellbender breeding season (August--mid-October); Hatching = egg hatching season (Late October--November); Pre-Breeding = hellbender pre-breeding season (June)
- edna_result: Overall positive or negative result for eDNA sample; positive if at least one of nine qPCR replicates amplified for hellbender eDNA; negative if zero of nine qPCR replicates amplified for hellbender eDNA
- edna_conc: Environmental DNA concentration (pg/uL) estimated in QuantStudio Design & Analysis Software based on 10x-fold dilution standard curves and averaged across three spatial replicates
- detect_rate: Detection rate of eDNA amplification within 27 qPCR replicates. Ranges from 0-1.
File: WaterChem_PosteriorDistributions_Concentrations.csv
Description: Posterior distributions (mean and 85 % and 95 % credible intervals) for the six MCMC GLMMs assessing the effect of water chemistry variables on eDNA concentrations
Variables
- sites: Number of sites included in the model
- covariate: water chemistry covariates included in the model
- mean: mean estimate of the posterior distribution
- q2.5: 2.5 % quantile for the posterior distribution
- q7.5: 7.5 % quantile for the posterior distribution
- q92.5: 92.5 % quantile for the posterior distribution
- q97.5: 97.5 % quantile for the posterior distribution
- p-value: p-value for each covariate included in the model
File: WaterChem_PosteriorDistributions_Detections.csv
Description: Posterior distributions (mean and 85 % and 95 % credible intervals) for the six MCMC GLMMs assessing the effect of water chemistry variables on eDNA detections
Variables
- sites: Number of sites included in the model
- covariate: water chemistry covariates included in the model
- mean: mean estimate of the posterior distribution
- q2.5: 2.5 % quantile for the posterior distribution
- q7.5: 7.5 % quantile for the posterior distribution
- q92.5: 92.5 % quantile for the posterior distribution
- q97.5: 97.5 % quantile for the posterior distribution
- p-value: p-value for each covariate included in the model
File: Dryad_RScript_Spatiotemporal_eDNA_Variation.R
Description: R code for each analysis presented in the manuscript. Code excludes exploratory investigations into the data and model comparisions.
Code/software
The available R code includes all code relevant to the analyses and production of figures included in the manuscript. The code does not include analyses not discussed in the manuscript such as exploratory visualizations of the data or model comparisons. R (v 4.4.2) is required to run these analyses. All required packages are listed in the code provided.
Sample Collection
We collected water samples from 90 sites across 73 rivers in Kentucky from September 2019 to June 2021. One site located within the Licking River basin was included as a positive field control – this is the only known location in Kentucky where hellbenders are regularly observed and are actively reproducing. Once on location, we visually surveyed for the highest quality habitat available within 500 m upstream and downstream. We defined high-quality habitat as swift running, semi-shallow water located downstream of riffles with large rock slabs, boulders, or bedrock shelving with crevices, and gravel and cobble substrate (Mayasich et al. 2003). A 2 L eDNA sample was collected downstream of the highest quality habitat at all 90 sites during the hellbender breeding season in September and October. Of the 90 eDNA sites, 45 were randomly selected for additional temporal sampling during the November hatching and June pre-breeding seasons. Among the 45 temporally sampled sites, we collected eDNA samples at additional spatial replicates from 33 randomly selected sites. Three spatial replicates were collected: 1) directly downstream of the best available habitat consistent with the protocol used at all 90 sites, 2) 50 m downstream of Replicate 1, and 3) 50 m downstream of Replicate 2. Samples were collected at the most downstream replicate first to prevent potential eDNA contamination caused by upstream sediment.
All water samples were collected from the thalweg of the stream or as deep as possible after disturbed sediment was allowed to settle. Two autoclaved 1 L wide-mouth Nalgene bottles with lids attached were placed as close to the bottom of the stream as possible without disturbing the substrate, opened until filled, then resealed while still underwater. Samples were immediately placed on ice after being collected. A 250 mL water sample was then collected using the same technique to estimate conductivity, turbidity, total organic carbon (TOC), and pH. Surface water temperature was measured during each site visit using a digital waterproof thermometer. Flow velocity was also measured during each site visit and at each spatial replicate when appropriate by using a standardized float method (USGS 1982). Floats were conducted three times at each location and averaged for a final flow velocity estimate; if a site had spatial replicates, flow velocity was measured at each replicate and averaged for a single site-level estimate. All sampling equipment was sterilized in 10 % bleach, and clothing was changed in between sites. Negative field controls (i.e., 1 L autoclaved DI water) were used to monitor for cross-contamination between samples each day.
Water samples were filtered at the lab within 10 hours after collection through a 0.47 µm mixed cellulose ester membrane (Whatman) by using a sterile Nalgene filter holder with funnel, 1 L Nalgene filter flask, and Rocker 300, 60 Hz vacuum pump (Southern Labware). A negative control consisting of 1 L autoclaved DI water was filtered at the end of each day to test for cross-contamination that may have occurred during filtration. Filters were immediately frozen at -20 °C until eDNA was extracted. All filtering equipment was sterilized in 10% bleach and rinsed in DI water between samples and/or spatial replicates.
Laboratory Analysis
We extracted DNA from filter membranes following methods described by Spear et al. (2015). Filters were cut into small pieces and extracted using DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kits (Qiagen) following guidelines provided by the manufacturer, with the additional use of a Qiashredder spin column (Qiagen) to facilitate degradation of the filter membrane. Additionally, if multiple filters were needed to complete the filtration of a field sample, we combined these during the binding step of DNA extraction following the protocol of Takahashi et al. (2018). Briefly, the lysate derived from each filter was passed through the same spin column before being washed with AW1 buffer. One blank filter was incorporated into each round of DNA extraction to monitor for cross-contamination during DNA extraction.
We amplified eDNA samples at a 104 bp sequence of the mitochondrial cytochrome b region using nine quantitative PCR (qPCR) replicates per sample with primers and probes designed by Spear et al. (2015; Table S1 in associated manuscript). We ran 15 µL qPCR reactions on a QuantStudio3 thermocycler (Applied Biosystems) with 7.5 µL TaqMan Environmental Master Mix 2.0 (ThermoFisher Scientific Inc.), 0.6 µL (0.4 µM concentration) of each primer, 0.3 µL (0.2 µM concentration) of probe, 0.6 µL TaqMan Exogenous Internal Positive Control 10X Exo IPC Mix (Applied Biosystems), 0.3 µL TaqMan Exogenous Internal Positive Control 50X Exo IPC DNA (Applied Biosystems), 0.12 µL (0.4 µg/µL concentration) BSA, 1.98 µL nuclease-free water, and 3 µL of eDNA template. TaqMan Exogenous Internal Positive Controls were added to each sample reaction to monitor for inhibition. Thermo-cycling parameters followed those recommended for use with TaqMan Environmental Master Mix 2.0 and began with 10 min at 95 °C, followed by 45 cycles of 95 °C for 15 s and 60 °C for 1 min. Each plate contained three positive template controls obtained by extracting eDNA from aquarium tank water housing adult hellbenders and three negative template controls consisting of DI water. Triplicates of a standard dilution series composed of five or six 10x-fold dilutions ranging from 9.4-9.4x10 -5ng/µL or 1.14-1.14x10 -5 ng/µL were also included on each plate to estimate eDNA concentrations. Two hellbender tissue samples (94.0 and 11.4 ng/µL) were needed to develop our standard curves because all of the extracted DNA from our first sample was used in this study. DNA extraction, qPCR prep, and qPCR were conducted in separate rooms dedicated to each task to reduce the risk of cross-contamination.
We used QuantStudio Design and Analysis Software v1.5.1 (ThermoFisher Scientific Inc) to estimate eDNA concentrations in each qPCR replicate and calculate detection rates for each temporal or spatial replicate. We considered a sample positive when at least one of the nine qPCR replicates amplified, the curve morphology was uniform with the standard replicates, and the negative qPCR controls showed no amplification (Klymus et al. 2020).
