How low can they go: A comparison between dog (Canis familiaris) and environmental DNA detection of invasive koi carp (Cyprinus rubrofuscus)

Carp (Cyprinus sp.) are a highly invasive fish that pose a significant threat to freshwater ecosystems worldwide. At high biomasses (i.e., ≥100 kg/ha), the benthic feeding behaviour of carp can have deleterious ecosystem effects, often changing clear, macrophyte dominant waterbodies to turbid-phytop...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Applied animal behaviour science 2022-10, Vol.255, p.105729, Article 105729
Hauptverfasser: Collins, Melissa A., Browne, Clare M., Edwards, Timothy L., Ling, Nicholas, Tempero, Grant W., Gleeson, Dianne M., Crockett, Kymberly, Quaife, Jesse
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 105729
container_title Applied animal behaviour science
container_volume 255
creator Collins, Melissa A.
Browne, Clare M.
Edwards, Timothy L.
Ling, Nicholas
Tempero, Grant W.
Gleeson, Dianne M.
Crockett, Kymberly
Quaife, Jesse
description Carp (Cyprinus sp.) are a highly invasive fish that pose a significant threat to freshwater ecosystems worldwide. At high biomasses (i.e., ≥100 kg/ha), the benthic feeding behaviour of carp can have deleterious ecosystem effects, often changing clear, macrophyte dominant waterbodies to turbid-phytoplankton dominant ecosystems. To prevent carp from reaching ecologically harmful biomasses, early detection (i.e., before population establishment) and rapid control actions are vital. Boat electrofishing, netting, and environmental DNA (eDNA) are commonly used to survey for carp, but these methods can be expensive or time inefficient when fish densities are low. Scent-detection dogs have proven efficacious at detecting terrestrial and aquatic species and could represent an efficient method for early detection of carp invasions. Here, we investigated a dog’s sensitivity and specificity to carp scent using a multiple probe design experiment. The dog was trained to use an automated carousel independently of its handler and assessed water samples from aquaria containing either no fish scent (n = 3, non-target), goldfish (Carassius auratus) scent (n = 5, non-target) or carp scent (n = 9, target). The goldfish samples and six of the target samples were presented to the dog at a standard fish biomass concentration of 15.5 mg/L. The remaining three target samples (probes) were systematically diluted to determine the dog’s detection threshold. Results showed that the dog could detect carp housed under laboratory conditions down to a dilution equivalent biomass of 9.3 kg/ha (i.e., 0.5 mg carp/L), which is well below the likely biomass threshold of carp known to cause significant ecological impacts. The dog’s scent-detection performance was then compared with eDNA, an existing survey method. Quantitative PCR conducted on DNA extracted from laboratory aquaria filtrate revealed that the species-specific primer could detect carp at 9.3 kg/ha, but amplification rates at this dilution were low, as were all dilutions below the limit of quantification (≈160 kg/ha). These findings suggest that dogs could provide an accurate and highly sensitive method invasive fish detection. However, before deployment as a carp surveillance method, dogs’ performance on water samples collected from natural aquatic systems (i.e., lakes, ponds, rivers) needs to be evaluated. To our knowledge this is the first published study of its kind comparing a dog’s sensitivity to eDNA, and investigating the po
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105729
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2723113994</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0168159122001873</els_id><sourcerecordid>2723113994</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c345t-97fe18e1bd0e0e55eb765ab87f2b1dfbda6620df607c5c1730722b0f3a515ea3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkMtOAyEUhonRxHp5BcNSF1OBKUPHlU29JkY37gkDB6XOwAgzNX0HH1qa6toFIeH8l8OH0BklU0podbmaqr5vlXfdlBHG8iMXrN5DEzoXrKjJjO-jSRbOC8preoiOUloRQnhJyQR9P4Qv3OajlcfDO2zwW7jCC6xD16voUvC4geELwGMT3vD5MvckbFXnWredX2DlDQa_djH4DvygWnzzvMAGBtCDy_ZgsfNrldwa8EdwuSj2OWfTR-fHhOPYxGDHpMd0cYIOrGoTnP7ex-j17vZ1-VA8vdw_LhdPhS5nfChqYYHOgTaGAAHOoREVV81cWNZQYxujqooRYysiNNdUlEQw1hBbKk45qPIYne9i-xg-R0iD7FzS0GaGEMYkmWAlpWVdz7K02kl1DClFsDKv3am4kZTILX25kn_05Za-3NHPxuudEfI_1g6iTNqB12BczGCkCe6_iB_9o5NK</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2723113994</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How low can they go: A comparison between dog (Canis familiaris) and environmental DNA detection of invasive koi carp (Cyprinus rubrofuscus)</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Collins, Melissa A. ; Browne, Clare M. ; Edwards, Timothy L. ; Ling, Nicholas ; Tempero, Grant W. ; Gleeson, Dianne M. ; Crockett, Kymberly ; Quaife, Jesse</creator><creatorcontrib>Collins, Melissa A. ; Browne, Clare M. ; Edwards, Timothy L. ; Ling, Nicholas ; Tempero, Grant W. ; Gleeson, Dianne M. ; Crockett, Kymberly ; Quaife, Jesse</creatorcontrib><description>Carp (Cyprinus sp.) are a highly invasive fish that pose a significant threat to freshwater ecosystems worldwide. At high biomasses (i.e., ≥100 kg/ha), the benthic feeding behaviour of carp can have deleterious ecosystem effects, often changing clear, macrophyte dominant waterbodies to turbid-phytoplankton dominant ecosystems. To prevent carp from reaching ecologically harmful biomasses, early detection (i.e., before population establishment) and rapid control actions are vital. Boat electrofishing, netting, and environmental DNA (eDNA) are commonly used to survey for carp, but these methods can be expensive or time inefficient when fish densities are low. Scent-detection dogs have proven efficacious at detecting terrestrial and aquatic species and could represent an efficient method for early detection of carp invasions. Here, we investigated a dog’s sensitivity and specificity to carp scent using a multiple probe design experiment. The dog was trained to use an automated carousel independently of its handler and assessed water samples from aquaria containing either no fish scent (n = 3, non-target), goldfish (Carassius auratus) scent (n = 5, non-target) or carp scent (n = 9, target). The goldfish samples and six of the target samples were presented to the dog at a standard fish biomass concentration of 15.5 mg/L. The remaining three target samples (probes) were systematically diluted to determine the dog’s detection threshold. Results showed that the dog could detect carp housed under laboratory conditions down to a dilution equivalent biomass of 9.3 kg/ha (i.e., 0.5 mg carp/L), which is well below the likely biomass threshold of carp known to cause significant ecological impacts. The dog’s scent-detection performance was then compared with eDNA, an existing survey method. Quantitative PCR conducted on DNA extracted from laboratory aquaria filtrate revealed that the species-specific primer could detect carp at 9.3 kg/ha, but amplification rates at this dilution were low, as were all dilutions below the limit of quantification (≈160 kg/ha). These findings suggest that dogs could provide an accurate and highly sensitive method invasive fish detection. However, before deployment as a carp surveillance method, dogs’ performance on water samples collected from natural aquatic systems (i.e., lakes, ponds, rivers) needs to be evaluated. To our knowledge this is the first published study of its kind comparing a dog’s sensitivity to eDNA, and investigating the potential utility of dogs as an invasive fish detection method. •A dog and environmental DNA were compared for invasive carp detection.•Water samples were presented to the dog on an automated carousel in a laboratory.•The dog could detect carp before harmful densities (i.e., ≥100 kg/ha) were reached.•The dog and eDNA had similar levels of sensitivity (≈9.3 kg carp/ha).•Scent-detection dogs could represent an effective invasive fish detection method.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0168-1591</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-9045</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105729</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>animal behavior ; automation ; biomass ; boats ; Carassius auratus ; Carp ; Conservation ; Cyprinus ; detection limit ; dogs ; ecosystems ; Environmental DNA ; filtrates ; Freshwater ; goldfish ; Invasive fish ; invasive species ; koi ; macrophytes ; monitoring ; odors ; quantitative polymerase chain reaction ; Scent detection dogs ; surface water ; surveys</subject><ispartof>Applied animal behaviour science, 2022-10, Vol.255, p.105729, Article 105729</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c345t-97fe18e1bd0e0e55eb765ab87f2b1dfbda6620df607c5c1730722b0f3a515ea3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c345t-97fe18e1bd0e0e55eb765ab87f2b1dfbda6620df607c5c1730722b0f3a515ea3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168159122001873$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65534</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Collins, Melissa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Browne, Clare M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edwards, Timothy L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ling, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tempero, Grant W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gleeson, Dianne M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crockett, Kymberly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quaife, Jesse</creatorcontrib><title>How low can they go: A comparison between dog (Canis familiaris) and environmental DNA detection of invasive koi carp (Cyprinus rubrofuscus)</title><title>Applied animal behaviour science</title><description>Carp (Cyprinus sp.) are a highly invasive fish that pose a significant threat to freshwater ecosystems worldwide. At high biomasses (i.e., ≥100 kg/ha), the benthic feeding behaviour of carp can have deleterious ecosystem effects, often changing clear, macrophyte dominant waterbodies to turbid-phytoplankton dominant ecosystems. To prevent carp from reaching ecologically harmful biomasses, early detection (i.e., before population establishment) and rapid control actions are vital. Boat electrofishing, netting, and environmental DNA (eDNA) are commonly used to survey for carp, but these methods can be expensive or time inefficient when fish densities are low. Scent-detection dogs have proven efficacious at detecting terrestrial and aquatic species and could represent an efficient method for early detection of carp invasions. Here, we investigated a dog’s sensitivity and specificity to carp scent using a multiple probe design experiment. The dog was trained to use an automated carousel independently of its handler and assessed water samples from aquaria containing either no fish scent (n = 3, non-target), goldfish (Carassius auratus) scent (n = 5, non-target) or carp scent (n = 9, target). The goldfish samples and six of the target samples were presented to the dog at a standard fish biomass concentration of 15.5 mg/L. The remaining three target samples (probes) were systematically diluted to determine the dog’s detection threshold. Results showed that the dog could detect carp housed under laboratory conditions down to a dilution equivalent biomass of 9.3 kg/ha (i.e., 0.5 mg carp/L), which is well below the likely biomass threshold of carp known to cause significant ecological impacts. The dog’s scent-detection performance was then compared with eDNA, an existing survey method. Quantitative PCR conducted on DNA extracted from laboratory aquaria filtrate revealed that the species-specific primer could detect carp at 9.3 kg/ha, but amplification rates at this dilution were low, as were all dilutions below the limit of quantification (≈160 kg/ha). These findings suggest that dogs could provide an accurate and highly sensitive method invasive fish detection. However, before deployment as a carp surveillance method, dogs’ performance on water samples collected from natural aquatic systems (i.e., lakes, ponds, rivers) needs to be evaluated. To our knowledge this is the first published study of its kind comparing a dog’s sensitivity to eDNA, and investigating the potential utility of dogs as an invasive fish detection method. •A dog and environmental DNA were compared for invasive carp detection.•Water samples were presented to the dog on an automated carousel in a laboratory.•The dog could detect carp before harmful densities (i.e., ≥100 kg/ha) were reached.•The dog and eDNA had similar levels of sensitivity (≈9.3 kg carp/ha).•Scent-detection dogs could represent an effective invasive fish detection method.</description><subject>animal behavior</subject><subject>automation</subject><subject>biomass</subject><subject>boats</subject><subject>Carassius auratus</subject><subject>Carp</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Cyprinus</subject><subject>detection limit</subject><subject>dogs</subject><subject>ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental DNA</subject><subject>filtrates</subject><subject>Freshwater</subject><subject>goldfish</subject><subject>Invasive fish</subject><subject>invasive species</subject><subject>koi</subject><subject>macrophytes</subject><subject>monitoring</subject><subject>odors</subject><subject>quantitative polymerase chain reaction</subject><subject>Scent detection dogs</subject><subject>surface water</subject><subject>surveys</subject><issn>0168-1591</issn><issn>1872-9045</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkMtOAyEUhonRxHp5BcNSF1OBKUPHlU29JkY37gkDB6XOwAgzNX0HH1qa6toFIeH8l8OH0BklU0podbmaqr5vlXfdlBHG8iMXrN5DEzoXrKjJjO-jSRbOC8preoiOUloRQnhJyQR9P4Qv3OajlcfDO2zwW7jCC6xD16voUvC4geELwGMT3vD5MvckbFXnWredX2DlDQa_djH4DvygWnzzvMAGBtCDy_ZgsfNrldwa8EdwuSj2OWfTR-fHhOPYxGDHpMd0cYIOrGoTnP7ex-j17vZ1-VA8vdw_LhdPhS5nfChqYYHOgTaGAAHOoREVV81cWNZQYxujqooRYysiNNdUlEQw1hBbKk45qPIYne9i-xg-R0iD7FzS0GaGEMYkmWAlpWVdz7K02kl1DClFsDKv3am4kZTILX25kn_05Za-3NHPxuudEfI_1g6iTNqB12BczGCkCe6_iB_9o5NK</recordid><startdate>202210</startdate><enddate>202210</enddate><creator>Collins, Melissa A.</creator><creator>Browne, Clare M.</creator><creator>Edwards, Timothy L.</creator><creator>Ling, Nicholas</creator><creator>Tempero, Grant W.</creator><creator>Gleeson, Dianne M.</creator><creator>Crockett, Kymberly</creator><creator>Quaife, Jesse</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202210</creationdate><title>How low can they go: A comparison between dog (Canis familiaris) and environmental DNA detection of invasive koi carp (Cyprinus rubrofuscus)</title><author>Collins, Melissa A. ; Browne, Clare M. ; Edwards, Timothy L. ; Ling, Nicholas ; Tempero, Grant W. ; Gleeson, Dianne M. ; Crockett, Kymberly ; Quaife, Jesse</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c345t-97fe18e1bd0e0e55eb765ab87f2b1dfbda6620df607c5c1730722b0f3a515ea3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>animal behavior</topic><topic>automation</topic><topic>biomass</topic><topic>boats</topic><topic>Carassius auratus</topic><topic>Carp</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Cyprinus</topic><topic>detection limit</topic><topic>dogs</topic><topic>ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental DNA</topic><topic>filtrates</topic><topic>Freshwater</topic><topic>goldfish</topic><topic>Invasive fish</topic><topic>invasive species</topic><topic>koi</topic><topic>macrophytes</topic><topic>monitoring</topic><topic>odors</topic><topic>quantitative polymerase chain reaction</topic><topic>Scent detection dogs</topic><topic>surface water</topic><topic>surveys</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Collins, Melissa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Browne, Clare M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edwards, Timothy L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ling, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tempero, Grant W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gleeson, Dianne M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crockett, Kymberly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quaife, Jesse</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><jtitle>Applied animal behaviour science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Collins, Melissa A.</au><au>Browne, Clare M.</au><au>Edwards, Timothy L.</au><au>Ling, Nicholas</au><au>Tempero, Grant W.</au><au>Gleeson, Dianne M.</au><au>Crockett, Kymberly</au><au>Quaife, Jesse</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How low can they go: A comparison between dog (Canis familiaris) and environmental DNA detection of invasive koi carp (Cyprinus rubrofuscus)</atitle><jtitle>Applied animal behaviour science</jtitle><date>2022-10</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>255</volume><spage>105729</spage><pages>105729-</pages><artnum>105729</artnum><issn>0168-1591</issn><eissn>1872-9045</eissn><abstract>Carp (Cyprinus sp.) are a highly invasive fish that pose a significant threat to freshwater ecosystems worldwide. At high biomasses (i.e., ≥100 kg/ha), the benthic feeding behaviour of carp can have deleterious ecosystem effects, often changing clear, macrophyte dominant waterbodies to turbid-phytoplankton dominant ecosystems. To prevent carp from reaching ecologically harmful biomasses, early detection (i.e., before population establishment) and rapid control actions are vital. Boat electrofishing, netting, and environmental DNA (eDNA) are commonly used to survey for carp, but these methods can be expensive or time inefficient when fish densities are low. Scent-detection dogs have proven efficacious at detecting terrestrial and aquatic species and could represent an efficient method for early detection of carp invasions. Here, we investigated a dog’s sensitivity and specificity to carp scent using a multiple probe design experiment. The dog was trained to use an automated carousel independently of its handler and assessed water samples from aquaria containing either no fish scent (n = 3, non-target), goldfish (Carassius auratus) scent (n = 5, non-target) or carp scent (n = 9, target). The goldfish samples and six of the target samples were presented to the dog at a standard fish biomass concentration of 15.5 mg/L. The remaining three target samples (probes) were systematically diluted to determine the dog’s detection threshold. Results showed that the dog could detect carp housed under laboratory conditions down to a dilution equivalent biomass of 9.3 kg/ha (i.e., 0.5 mg carp/L), which is well below the likely biomass threshold of carp known to cause significant ecological impacts. The dog’s scent-detection performance was then compared with eDNA, an existing survey method. Quantitative PCR conducted on DNA extracted from laboratory aquaria filtrate revealed that the species-specific primer could detect carp at 9.3 kg/ha, but amplification rates at this dilution were low, as were all dilutions below the limit of quantification (≈160 kg/ha). These findings suggest that dogs could provide an accurate and highly sensitive method invasive fish detection. However, before deployment as a carp surveillance method, dogs’ performance on water samples collected from natural aquatic systems (i.e., lakes, ponds, rivers) needs to be evaluated. To our knowledge this is the first published study of its kind comparing a dog’s sensitivity to eDNA, and investigating the potential utility of dogs as an invasive fish detection method. •A dog and environmental DNA were compared for invasive carp detection.•Water samples were presented to the dog on an automated carousel in a laboratory.•The dog could detect carp before harmful densities (i.e., ≥100 kg/ha) were reached.•The dog and eDNA had similar levels of sensitivity (≈9.3 kg carp/ha).•Scent-detection dogs could represent an effective invasive fish detection method.</abstract><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105729</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0168-1591
ispartof Applied animal behaviour science, 2022-10, Vol.255, p.105729, Article 105729
issn 0168-1591
1872-9045
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2723113994
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects animal behavior
automation
biomass
boats
Carassius auratus
Carp
Conservation
Cyprinus
detection limit
dogs
ecosystems
Environmental DNA
filtrates
Freshwater
goldfish
Invasive fish
invasive species
koi
macrophytes
monitoring
odors
quantitative polymerase chain reaction
Scent detection dogs
surface water
surveys
title How low can they go: A comparison between dog (Canis familiaris) and environmental DNA detection of invasive koi carp (Cyprinus rubrofuscus)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T07%3A44%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20low%20can%20they%20go:%20A%20comparison%20between%20dog%20(Canis%20familiaris)%20and%20environmental%20DNA%20detection%20of%20invasive%20koi%20carp%20(Cyprinus%20rubrofuscus)&rft.jtitle=Applied%20animal%20behaviour%20science&rft.au=Collins,%20Melissa%20A.&rft.date=2022-10&rft.volume=255&rft.spage=105729&rft.pages=105729-&rft.artnum=105729&rft.issn=0168-1591&rft.eissn=1872-9045&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105729&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2723113994%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2723113994&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0168159122001873&rfr_iscdi=true