eDNA-based crayfish plague detection as practical tool for biomonitoring and risk assessment of A. astaci-positive crayfish populations

eDNA monitoring as a tool for evaluating the reintroduction of Austropotamobius pallipes after a crayfish plague outbreak

The crayfish plague, a severe disease caused by the oomycete Aphanomyces astaci, is responsible for most population declines of susceptible crayfish in Europe. This pathogen has been devastating native populations of Austropotamobius pallipes since the 1970s in the Iberian Peninsula. In this study, we report a massive mortality event in one of the most important Spanish populations of A. pallipes. We aimed to: (i) identify the cause of the mortality, and (ii) evaluate the reintroduction viability of the species. Over the course of six months, we used environmental DNA (eDNA) and traditional trap-based methods to detect the presence of A. astaci or of native or invasive crayfish in order to evaluate the reintroduction viability of A. pallipes to the affected population. We did not capture any live crayfish or detect the presence of A. astaci in the reservoir water during the six months following the mass mortality event. Our analyses indicated that it was feasible to initiate a reintroduction program at the site, which will continue to be monitored for three to five years and will help improve the conservation status of A. pallipes.

Molecular detection of Aphanomyces astaci - An improved species specific qPCR assay

The parasitic oomycete Aphanomyces astaci is the causative agent of crayfish plague, a devastating disease for European freshwater crayfish. Species specific quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) can offer rapid detection of the pathogen. However, the well established A. astaci qPCR assay recommended by the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) amplifies the recently described Aphanomyces fennicus. Consequently, false-positive results may occur. This calls for the improvement of the established species specific A. astaci qPCR assay in order to avoid amplifying A. fennicus while screening for A. astaci. We developed an improved species specific A. astaci qPCR assay and validated the assay across three laboratories, using established procedures including different qPCR master mixes for each respective laboratory. Genomic DNA from A. astaci, A. fennicus and closely related Aphanomyces spp. was analysed and compared with both the improved and established assay. Additionally, DNA from crayfish tissue and environmental samples were analysed with both assays. The improved assay showed similar sensitivity with the established assay for all sample types, while proving highly specific for A. astaci avoiding amplification of A. fennicus and the other tested Aphanomyces spp. Environmental DNA (eDNA) samples collected at River Lierelva in Norway amplified with the established assay, but not with the improved assay indicating false positive. We were able to sequence a 530 bp fragment of the ITS region from these eDNA samples and the consensus sequence showed 99.9-100 % pairwise identity with A. fennicus and 97.2-98 % pairwise identity with A. astaci, suggesting that the occurrence of A. fennicus is not limited to Finland, where it was first discovered.

Aquatic environmental DNA: A review of the macro-organismal biomonitoring revolution

Environmental DNA (eDNA) is the fastest growing biomonitoring tool fuelled by two key features: time efficiency and sensitivity. Technological advancements allow rapid biodiversity detection at both species and community levels with increasing accuracy. Concurrently, there has been a global demand to standardise eDNA methods, but this is only possible with an in-depth overview of the technological advancements and a discussion of the pros and cons of available methods. We therefore conducted a systematic literature review of 407 peer-reviewed papers on aquatic eDNA published between 2012 and 2021. We observed a gradual increase in the annual number of publications from four (2012) to 28 (2018), followed by a rapid growth to 124 publications in 2021. This was mirrored by a tremendous diversification of methods in all aspects of the eDNA workflow. For example, in 2012 only freezing was applied to preserve filter samples, whereas we recorded 12 different preservation methods in the 2021 literature. Despite an ongoing standardisation debate in the eDNA community, the field is seemingly moving fast in the opposite direction and we discuss the reasons and implications. Moreover, by compiling the largest PCR-primer database to date, we provide information on 522 and 141 published species-specific and metabarcoding primers targeting a wide range of aquatic organisms. This works as a user-friendly 'distillation' of primer information that was hitherto scattered across hundreds of papers, but the list also reflects which taxa are commonly studied with eDNA technology in aquatic environments such as fish and amphibians, and reveals that groups such as corals, plankton and algae are under-studied. Efforts to improve sampling and extraction methods, primer specificity and reference databases are crucial to capture these ecologically important taxa in future eDNA biomonitoring surveys. In a rapidly diversifying field, this review synthetises aquatic eDNA procedures and can guide eDNA users towards best practice.

Environmental DNA/RNA for pathogen and parasite detection, surveillance, and ecology

Detection of pathogens, parasites, and other symbionts in environmental samples via eDNA/eRNA (collectively eNA) is an increasingly important source of information about their occurrence and activity. There is great potential for using such detections as a proxy for infection of host organisms in connected habitats, for pathogen monitoring and surveillance, and for early warning systems for disease. However, many factors require consideration, and appropriate methods developed and verified, in order that eNA detections can be reliably interpreted and adopted for surveillance and assessment of disease risk, and potentially inclusion in international standards, such as the World Organisation for Animal Health guidelines. Disease manifestation results from host-symbiont-environment interactions between hosts, demanding a multifactorial approach to interpretation of eNA signals.

Using eDNA to simultaneously detect the distribution of native and invasive crayfish within an entire country

The introduction of invasive crayfish has led to a decline of many European native species of crayfish across their range. In this study, novel duplex assays for all crayfish occurring in Switzerland were developed. We aimed to identify the distribution of the seven species using a traditional trap surveillance method as well by collecting water samples to detect eDNA by species-specific quantitative real-time PCR. We reveal our overall experience in finding optimal field and laboratory techniques to discover the distribution and abundance of native and invasive species in order to enhance knowledge of early invasive species invasion and highlight important pockets of populations where native species remain, for implementation of conservation strategies. Using eDNA, important populations of native noble and white-clawed crayfish were revealed in multiple waters across various cantons. The successful identification of native and invasive crayfish species in Switzerland using eDNA can be applied to future nationwide projects. This method which has the ability to detect all species simultaneously across an entire country, will allow an improvement in freshwater crayfish conservation management.

Parasite DNA detection in water samples enhances crayfish plague monitoring in asymptomatic invasive populations

Invasive species can facilitate the spread of pathogens by first providing asymptomatic host reservoirs, and then driving disease outbreaks in native populations through pathogen spillover. An example of this are invasive crayfish species in Europe (Faxonius limosus, Pacifastacus leniusculus, Procambarus clarkii), which carry the deadly plague agent (Aphanomyces astaci). Effective disease management requires comprehensive monitoring, however, pathogen detection in carrier populations with low pathogen prevalence and intensities is challenging. We simultaneously collected and analysed crayfish tissue samples of invasive crayfish populations and water samples to compare A. astaci detection in different sample types using quantitative PCR. Combined, the two sampling methods revealed A. astaci presence with DNA concentrations above limit of detection (LOD; the lowest concentration which can be detected with reasonable certainty) in 13 of 23 invasive crayfish populations. In four additional sites, A. astaci DNA concentrations below LOD were found in water. In four populations only were A. astaci concentrations above LOD detected in both sample types and in three populations in concentrations above LOD in tissue but below LOD in water. The likely reason for these discrepancies is the low A. astaci prevalence and concentration in resistant invasive crayfish, which limit detection reliability. Consistency may be improved by timing surveys with seasonal periods of high A. astaci abundance and by increasing water sampling effort. Considering the ease of collecting eDNA samples, compared to crayfish tissue sampling, eDNA methods would facilitate frequent and comprehensive surveys. However, remaining uncertainties in eDNA-based detection reveal the relevance of combining monitoring tools to improve detection of invasive pathogens and their management.

Simultaneous detection of native and invasive crayfish and Aphanomyces astaci from environmental DNA samples in a wide range of habitats in Central Europe

Crayfish of North American origin are amongst the most prominent high-impact invasive invertebrates in European freshwaters. They contribute to the decline of European native crayfish species by spreading the pathogen causing crayfish plague, the oomyceteAphanomyces astaci. In this study we validated the specificity of four quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays, either published or newly developed, usable for environmental DNA (eDNA) screening for widely distributed native and non-native crayfish present in Central Europe:Astacus astacus,Pacifastacus leniusculus,Faxonius limosusandProcambarus virginalis. We then conducted an eDNA monitoring survey of these crayfish as well as the crayfish plague pathogen in a wide variety of habitat types representative for Central and Western Europe. The specificity of qPCR assays was validated against an extensive collection of crayfish DNA isolates, containing most crayfish species documented from European waters. The three assays developed in this study were sufficiently species-specific, but the published assay forF. limosusdisplayed a weak cross-reaction with multiple other crayfish species of the family Cambaridae. In the field study, we infrequently detected eDNA ofA. astacitogether with the three non-native crayfish species under examination. We never detected eDNA fromA. astacitogether with native crayfish, but in a few locations eDNA from both native and non-native crayfish was captured, due either to passive transport of eDNA from upstream populations or co-existence in the absence of infected crayfish carriers ofA. astaci. In the study, we evaluated a robust, easy-to-use and low-cost version of the eDNA sampling equipment, based mostly on items readily available in garden stores and hobby markets, for filtering relatively large (~5 l) water samples. It performed just as well as the far more expensive equipment industrially designed for eDNA water sampling, thus opening the possibility of collecting suitable eDNA samples to a wide range of stakeholders. Overall, our study confirms that eDNA-based screening for crayfish and their associated pathogen is a feasible alternative to traditional monitoring.