The challenge of eDNA extraction in tropical aquatic ecosystems: Implications for monitoring the West Indian manatee
Palabras clave:
Environmental DNA, tropical ecosystems, DNA extraction, non-invasive monitoring, Trichechus manatus manatusResumen
Background. Monitoring threatened species with low population densities in tropical aquatic ecosystems presents significant methodological challenges, particularly for elusive and cryptic organisms such as the manatee (Trichechus manatus manatus). Environmental DNA (eDNA) has emerged as a promising non-invasive tool; however, its efficiency may be strongly affected by complex environmental matrices such as turbid waters and inhibitor-rich sediments. Goals. To evaluate the effectiveness of eDNA for detecting manatee presence in tropical aquatic systems of the southern Gulf of Mexico and to compare different extraction methods for water and sediment samples. Methods. Water and sediment samples were collected from four sites in Tabasco, Mexico. Two extraction methods were compared for water samples (phenol–chloroform and QIAGEN DNeasy Blood & Tissue commercial kit) and three for sediments (Chelex, chloroform–isoamyl alcohol, and CTAB). Detection was performed via quantitative real- time PCR (qPCR) using primers for manatees. DNA concentrations and amplification success were statistically analyzed in R software. Results. For water samples, both extraction methods yielded quantifiable DNA and amplification success rates above 90%, with no significant differences between them (p > 0.05). In sediments, although Chelex and chloroform methods producedhigher DNA concentrations, the CTAB protocol showed a significantly higher proportion of positive amplifications (87.5%, p < 0.001), indicating effective removal of PCR inhibitors. Conclusions. eDNA analysis confirms its applicability for detecting manatees in challenging tropical environments; however, the environmental matrix strongly influences methodological performance. Water samples are more reliable for routine monitoring, while CTAB is strongly recommended for sediment samples due to its superior amplification success.
Descargas
Citas
Alter, S. E., C. D. King, E. Chou, S. C. Chin, M. Rekdahl & H. C. Rosenbaum.
Using environmental DNA to detect whales and dolphins in the New York
Bight. Frontiers in Conservation Science 3: 820377. DOI:
3389/fcosc.2022.820377
Baker, C. S., D. Steel, S. Nieukirk & H. Klinck. 2018. Environmental DNA
(eDNA) from the wake of the whales: droplet digital PCR for detection and
species identification. Frontiers in Marine Science 5: 133. DOI:
3389/fmars.2018.00133
Barnes, M. A. & C. R. Turner. 2016. The ecology of environmental DNA and
implications for conservation genetics. Conservation Genetics 17(1): 1-17. DOI:
1007/s10592-015-0775-4
Bohmann, K., A. Evans, M. T. P. Gilbert, G. R. Carvalho, S. Creer, M. Knapp &
M. De Bruyn. 2014. Environmental DNA for wildlife biology and biodiversity
monitoring. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 29(6): 358-367. DOI:
1016/j.tree.2014.04.003
Borchers, D. L., B. C. Stevenson, D. Kidney, L. Thomas & T. A. Marques. 2015.
A unifying model for capture–recapture and distance sampling surveys of
wildlife populations. Journal of the American Statistical Association 110(509):
-204. DOI: 10.1080/01621459.2014.893884
Carroll, E. L., M. W. Bruford, J. A. DeWoody, G. Leroy, A. Strand, L. Waits & J.
Wang. 2018. Genetic and genomic monitoring with minimally invasive sampling
methods. Evolutionary Applications 11(7): 1094-1119. DOI: 10.1111/eva.12600
Castelblanco-Martínez, D. N., C. Nourisson, E. Quintana-Rizzo, J. Padilla-
Saldívar & J. J. Schmitter-Soto. 2013. Potential effects of human pressure and
habitat fragmentation on population viability of the Antillean manatee
Trichechus manatus manatus: a predictive model. Endangered Species
Research 18: 129-145. DOI: 10.3354/esr00439
Daniel-Rentería, I. C., A. Serrano & G. Sánchez-Rojas. 2012. Distribución del
manatí antillano (Trichechus manatus manatus) en el Sistema Lagunar de
Alvarado (Veracruz, México). Ciencias Marinas 38(3): 481-489. DOI:
7773/cm.v38i2.2062
Deiner, K., H. M. Bik, E. Mächler, M. Seymour, A. Lacoursière-Roussel, F.
Altermatt & L. Bernatchez. 2017. Environmental DNA metabarcoding:
transforming how we survey animal and plant communities. Molecular Ecology
(21): 5872-5895. DOI: 10.1111/mec.14350
Deiner, K., J. C. Walser, E. Mächler & F. Altermatt. 2015. Choice of capture and
extraction methods affect detection of freshwater biodiversity from
environmental DNA. Biological Conservation 183: 53-63. DOI:
1016/j.biocon.2014.11.018
Dejean, T., A. Valentini, C. Miquel, P. Taberlet, E. Bellemain & C. Miaud. 2012.
Improved detection of an alien invasive species through environmental DNA
barcoding: the example of the American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus.
Journal of Applied Ecology 49(4): 953-959. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-
2012.02171.x
del Rio-Lavín, A., E. Jiménez & M. A. Pardo. 2021. SYBR-green real-time PCR
assay with melting curve analysis for the rapid identification of Mytilus species
in food samples. Food Control 130: 108257. DOI:
1016/j.foodcont.2021.108257
Dempster, E. L., K. V. Pryor, D. Francis, J. E. Young & H. J. Rogers. 1999.
Rapid DNA extraction from ferns for PCR-based analyses. BioTechniques
(1): 66-68. DOI: 10.2144/99271bm13
Deutsch, C. J., C. Self-Sullivan & A. Mignucci-Giannoni. 2008. Trichechus
manatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T22103A9356917.
Díaz-Ferguson, E., R. Haney, J. Wares & B. Silliman. 2014. Population genetics
of a trochid gastropod broadens picture of Caribbean Sea connectivity. PLoS
ONE 9(9): e94516. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012675
Doyle, J. J. & J. L. Doyle. 1987. A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small
quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochemical Bulletin 19: 11-15.
Echeverría, B., I. B. Varela, J. M. Jiménez, M. Carvajal & T. Guzmán. 2021.
eDNA extraction protocol for metagenomic studies in tropical soils.
BioTechniques 71(6): 581-586. DOI: 10.2144/btn-2021-0057
Fernández-Álvarez, C., S. F. González & Y. Santos. 2016. Development of a
SYBR green I real-time PCR assay for specific identification of the fish
pathogen Aeromonas salmonicida subspecies salmonicida. Applied
Microbiology and Biotechnology 100(24): 10585-10595. DOI: 10.1007/s00253-
-7929-2
Fernández-Álvarez, C., S. F. González & Y. Santos. 2019. Quantitative PCR
coupled with melting curve analysis for rapid detection and quantification of
Tenacibaculum maritimum in fish and environmental samples. Aquaculture 498:
-296. DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2018.08.039
Ficetola, G. F., C. Miaud, F. Pompanon & P. Taberlet. 2008. Species detection
using environmental DNA from water samples. Biology Letters 4(4): 423-425.
DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2008.0118
Frankham, R. 2005. Genetics and extinction. Biological Conservation 126(2):
-140. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.05.002
Goldberg, C. S., C. R. Turner, K. Deiner, K. E. Klymus, P. F. Thomsen, M. A.
Murphy & P. Taberlet. 2016. Critical considerations for the application of
environmental DNA methods to detect aquatic species. Methods in Ecology and
Evolution 7(11): 1299-1307. DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.12595
Gómez-Carrasco, G., J. M. Lesher-Gordillo, L. D. Olivera-Gómez, D. N.
Castelblanco-Martínez, C. Nourisson, J. Padilla-Saldívar, E. Quintana-Rizzo &
J. J. Schmitter-Soto. 2018. Genetic diversity and structure from Antillean
manatee (Trichechus manatus manatus) in the southern Gulf of México:
comparison between connected and isolated populations. Tropical
Conservation Science 11. DOI: 10.1177/1940082918795560
Harrison, J. B., J. M. Sunday & S. M. Rogers. 2019. Predicting the fate of eDNA
in the environment and implications for studying biodiversity. Proceedings of the
Royal Society B 286(1915): 20191409. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2019.1409
Hu, Q., Y. Liu, S. Yi & D. Huang. 2015. A comparison of four methods for PCR
inhibitor removal. Forensic science international: Genetics, 16, 94-97. DOI:
1016/j.fsigen.2014.12.001
Hunter, M. E., J. A. Ferrante, G. Meigs-Friend & A. Ulmer. 2019. Improving
eDNA yield and inhibitor reduction through increased water volumes and
modified multi-filter isolation techniques. Scientific Reports 9: 5259. DOI:
1038/s41598-019-40977-w
Hunter, M. E., G. Meigs-Friend, J. A. Ferrante, A. Takoukam Kamla, R. M.
Dorazio, L. Keith-Diagne, F. Luna, J. M. Lanyon & J. P. Reid. 2018. Surveys of
environmental DNA (eDNA): a new approach to estimate occurrence in
Vulnerable manatee populations. Endangered Species Research 35: 101-111.
DOI: 10.3354/esr00880
Jerde, C. L., A. R. Mahon, W. L. Chadderton & D. M. Lodge. 2011. “Sight-
unseen” detection of rare aquatic species using environmental DNA.
Conservation Letters 4(2): 150-157. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00158.x
Koivuniemi M, M. Kurkilahti, M. Niemi, M. Auttila & M. Kunnasranta. 2019. A
mark–recapture approach for estimating population size of the endangered
ringed seal (Phoca hispida saimensis). PLoS ONE 14(3): e0214269. DOI:
1371/journal.pone.0214269
Luna, F. O., C. E. Beaver, C. Nourisson, R. K. Bonde, F. L. N. Attademo, A.
Miranda-Ribeiro & M. E. Hunter. 2021. Genetic connectivity of the West Indian
manatee in the southern range and limited evidence of gene flow with Brazil.
Biological Conservation 254: 108920. DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2020.574455
MacKenzie, D. I., J. D. Nichols, G. B. Lachman, S. Droege, J. A. Royle & C. A.
Langtimm. 2002. Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities
are less than one. Ecology 83(8): 2248-2255. DOI: 10.1890/0012-
(2002)083[2248:ESORWD]2.0.CO;2
McKee, A. M., S. F. Spear & T. W. Pierson. 2015. The effect of dilution and the
use of a post-extraction nucleic acid purification column on the accuracy,
precision, and inhibition of environmental DNA samples. Biological
Conservation 183: 70-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.031
Morales-Vela, B., D. Olivera-Gómez & J. E. Reynolds III. 2000. Distribution and
habitat use by manatees (Trichechus manatus manatus) in Belize and
Chetumal Bay, Mexico. Biological Conservation 95: 67-75. DOI:
1016/S0006-3207(00)00009-4
Morales-Vela B, E. Quintana-Rizzo & A. Mignucci-Giannoni. 2024. Trichechus
manatus ssp. manatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2024:
e.T22105A43793924. Available online at:
https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22105/43793924 (Accessed on 18 april
.
Nourisson, C., B. Morales-Vela, J. Padilla-Saldívar, K. P. Tucker, A. M. Clark, L.
D. Olivera-Gómez, R. Bonde, P. McGuire. 2011. Evidence of two genetic
clusters of manatees with low genetic diversity in Mexico and implications for
their conservation. Genetica 139: 833-842. DOI: 10.1007/s10709-011-9583-z
Olivera-Gómez, L. D. & D. Jiménez-Domínguez. 2019. El manatí (Trichechus
manatus manatus) en los sistemas fluviolagunares. En: La biodiversidad en
Tabasco. Estudio de Estado. Vol. II. CONABIO, México, pp. 350-354.
Olivera-Gómez, L. D., D. Jiménez-Domínguez, B. Morales-Vela & J. L. García-
Herrera. 2022. Distribución espacial del manatí en la planicie costera del sur
del Golfo de México. Ecosistemas y Recursos Agropecuarios 9(2): 1. DOI:
19136/era.a9n2.3144
Opel, K. L., D. Chung & B. R. McCord. 2010. A study of PCR inhibition
mechanisms using real time PCR. Journal of Forensic Sciences 55(1): 25-33.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01245.x
Pascher, K., V. Švara & M. Jungmeier. 2022. Environmental DNA-based
methods in biodiversity monitoring of protected areas: Application range,
limitations, and needs. Diversity 14(6): 463. DOI: 10.3390/d14060463
Pérez-Garduza, F., L. D. Olivera-Gómez, H. D. L. Cueva, M. G. Hidalgo-Mihart
& D. Jiménez-Domínguez. 2023. Density and abundance estimate of Antillean
manatees (Trichechus manatus) within a landlocked lake in Southeastern
México. Therya 14(2): 253-259. DOI: 10.12933/therya-23-2310
Piggott, M. P. 2016. Evaluating the effects of laboratory protocols on eDNA
detection probability for an endangered freshwater fish. Ecology and Evolution
(9): 2739-2750. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.2083
Pilliod, D. S., C. S. Goldberg, R. S. Arkle & L. P. Waits. 2014. Factors
influencing detection of eDNA from a stream-dwelling amphibian. Molecular
Ecology Resources 14(1): 109-116. DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.12159
Pinfield, R., E. Dillane, A. K. M. Runge, A. Evans, H. I. Browman, D. Brophy & I.
Coscia. 2019. False-negative detections from environmental DNA collected in
the presence of large numbers of killer whales (Orcinus orca). Environmental
DNA 1(4): 316-328. DOI: 10.1002/edn3.32
R Core Team. 2025. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.
R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Disponible en línea en:
https://www.r-project.org/ (consultado el 20 febrero 2026)
Rawlence, N. J., D. J. Lowe, J. R. Wood, J. M. Young, G. J. Churchman, Y. T.
Huang & A. Cooper. 2014. Using palaeoenvironmental DNA to reconstruct past
environments: progress and prospects. Journal of Quaternary Science 29(7):
-626. DOI: 10.1002/jqs.2740
Rees, H. C., B. C. Maddison, D. J. Middleditch, J. R. Patmore & K. C. Gough.
The detection of aquatic animal species using environmental DNA–a
review of eDNA as a survey tool in ecology. Journal of Applied Ecology 51(5):
-1459. DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.12306
Renshaw, M. A., B. P. Olds, C. L. Jerde, M. M. McVeigh & D. M. Lodge. 2015.
The room temperature preservation of filtered environmental DNA samples and
assimilation into a phenol–chloroform–isoamyl alcohol DNA extraction.
Molecular Ecology Resources 15(1): 168-176. DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.12281
Rodas-Trejo, J., E. I. Romero-Berny & A. Estrada. 2008. Distribution and
conservation of the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus manatus) in the
Catazajá wetlands of northeast Chiapas, México. Tropical Conservation
Science 1(4): 321-333. DOI: 10.1177/194008290800100403
Ruppert, K. M., R. J. Kline & M. S. Rahman. 2019. Past, present, and future
perspectives of environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding: a systematic
review in methods, monitoring, and applications of global eDNA. Global
Ecology and Conservation 17: e00547. DOI: 10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00547
Sahu, A., N. Kumar, C. P. Singh & M. Singh. 2023. Environmental DNA (eDNA):
Powerful technique for biodiversity conservation. Journal for Nature
Conservation, 71, 126325. DOI: 10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126325
Santini, L., A. Benítez‐López, C. F. Dormann & M. A. Huijbregts. 2022.
Population density estimates for terrestrial mammal species. Global Ecology
and Biogeography, 31(5), 978-994. DOI: 10.1111/geb.13476
Schrader, C., A. Schielke, L. Ellerbroek & R. Johne. 2012. PCR inhibitors –
occurrence, properties and removal. Journal of Applied Microbiology 113(5):
-1026. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05384.x
SEMARNAT. 2010. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010,
Protección ambiental-Especies nativas de México de flora y fauna silvestres-
Categorías de riesgo y especificaciones para su inclusión, exclusión o cambio-
Lista de especies en riesgo. Diario Oficial de la Federación, 30 de diciembre de
SEMARNAT, 2020. Programa de Acción para la Conservación de la Especie
Manatí de las Antillas (Trichechus manatus manatus). SEMARNAT/CONANP,
México.
Sidstedt, M., P. Rådström & J. Hedman. 2020. PCR inhibition in qPCR, dPCR
and MPS—mechanisms and solutions. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
(9): 2009-2023. DOI: 10.1007/s00216-020-02490-2
Sigsgaard, E. E., M. R. Jensen, I. E. Winkelmann, P. R. Møller, M. M. Hansen &
P. F. Thomsen. 2020. Population-level inferences from environmental
DNA—current status and future perspectives. Evolutionary Applications 13(2):
-262. DOI: 10.1111/eva.12882
Sigsgaard, E. E., I. B. Nielsen, S. S. Bach, E. D. Lorenzen, D. P. Robinson, S.
W. Knudsen & P. F. Thomsen. 2016. Population characteristics of a large whale
shark aggregation inferred from seawater environmental DNA. Nature Ecology
& Evolution 1(1): 0004. DOI: 10.1038/s41559-016-0004
Singh, U. A., M. Kumari & S. Iyengar. 2018. Method for improving the quality of
genomic DNA obtained from minute quantities of tissue and blood samples
using Chelex 100 resin. Biological Procedures Online 20:12. DOI:
1186/s12575-018-0077-6
Strickler, K. M., A. K. Fremier & C. S. Goldberg. 2015. Quantifying effects of
UV-B, temperature, and pH on eDNA degradation in aquatic microcosms.
Biological Conservation 183: 85-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.038
Suarez-Bregua, P., M. Álvarez-González, K. M. Parsons, J. Rotllant, G. J.
Pierce & C. Saavedra. 2022. Environmental DNA (eDNA) for monitoring marine
mammals: Challenges and opportunities. Frontiers in Marine Science 9:
DOI: 0.3389/fmars.2022.987774
Taberlet, P., E. Coissac, M. Hajibabaei & L. H. Rieseberg. 2012. Environmental
DNA. Molecular Ecology 21(8): 1789-1793. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-
X.2012.05542.x
Takahashi, M., M. Saccò, J. H. Kestel, G. Nester, M. A. Campbell, M. Van Der
Heyde & M. E. Allentoft. 2023. Aquatic environmental DNA: A review of the
macro-organismal biomonitoring revolution. Science of the Total
Environment 873: 162322. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162322
Thompson, W. L. 2004. Sampling Rare or Elusive Species: Concepts, Designs,
and Techniques for Estimating Population Parameters. Island Press.
Thomsen, P. F. & E. Willerslev. 2015. Environmental DNA – an emerging tool in
conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity. Biological
Conservation 183: 4-18. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.019
Turner, C. R., K. L. Uy & R. C. Everhart. 2015. Fish environmental DNA is more
concentrated in aquatic sediments than surface water. Biological Conservation
: 93-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.017
Walsh, P. S., D. A. Metzger & R. Higuchi. 1991. Chelex 100 as a medium for
simple extraction of DNA for PCR-based typing from forensic material.
BioTechniques 10(4): 506-513. DOI: 10.2144/000114018
Wilson, I. G. 1997. Inhibition and facilitation of nucleic acid amplification.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology 63(10): 3741-3751. DOI:
1128/aem.63.10.3741-3751.1997
Young, R., B. Boucher, S. A. Micallef & G. B. Pasternack. 2017. A spatially and
temporally robust survey of environmental DNA (eDNA) from an anadromous
fish in a large river system. PLoS ONE 12(7): e0181955. DOI:
1371/journal.pone.0181955
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 HIDROBIOLÓGICA
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
Los autores/as que publiquen en esta revista aceptan las siguientes condiciones:
De acuerdo con la legislación de derechos de autor, HIDROBIOLÓGICA reconoce y respeta el derecho moral de los autores, así como la titularidad del derecho patrimonial, el cual será cedido a la revista para su difusión en acceso abierto.
Publicar en la revista HIDROBIOLÓGICA tiene un costo de recuperación de $500 pesos mexicanos por página en blanco y negro (aproximadamente 29 dólares americanos) y $1000 pesos por página a color (aproximadamente 58 dólares americanos).
Todos los textos publicados por HIDROBIOLÓGICA sin excepción se distribuyen amparados bajo la licencia Creative Commons 4.0Atribución-No Comercial (CC BY-NC 4.0 Internacional), que permite a terceros utilizar lo publicado siempre que mencionen la autoría del trabajo y a la primera publicación en esta revista.
Los autores/as pueden realizar otros acuerdos contractuales independientes y adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del artículo publicado en HIDROBIOLÓGICA (por ejemplo incluirlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro) siempre que indiquen claramente que el trabajo se publicó por primera vez en HIDROBIOLÓGICA.
Para todo lo anterior, el o los autor(es) deben remitir el formato de Carta-Cesión de la Propiedad de los Derechos de la primera publicación debidamente requisitado y firmado por el autor(es). Este formato se puede enviar por correo electrónico en archivo pdf al correo: enlacerebvistahidrobiológica@gmail.com; rehb@xanum.uam.mx (Carta-Cesión de Propiedad de Derechos de Autor).
Esta obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-No Comercial 4.0 Internacional.
