EnviroDNA Academic Publications
We have brought together a team of postdoctoral researchers from molecular science, data science and wildlife ecology, who have collaborated both within our team and with external partners on numerous academic research publications to advance the field of environmental DNA science. Explore our list of eDNA-related publications below.
McColl-Gausden EF, Griffiths J, Weeks AR, Tingley R. 2024. Using eDNA sampling to identify correlates of species occupancy across broad spatial scales. Diversity and Distributions e13926.
Sperring VF, Weeks AR, Webster W, Macgregor NA, Wilson M, Isaac B, Clarke RH. 2024. Diet breadth of a critically endangered owl presents challenges for invasive rodent management: a conservation conundrum. Emu – Austral Ornithology 124, 187-198.
Clark ZSR, Fish JJ, Butcher PA, Holland OJ, Sherman CDH, Rizzari J, Weeks AR, Miller AD. 2023. Insights into the diet and trophic ecology of white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) gained through DNA metabarcoding analyses of cloacal swabs. Environmental DNA 5, 1362-1377.
McColl-Gausden EF, Griffiths J, Collins L, Weeks AR, Tingley R. 2023. The power of eDNA sampling to investigate the impac of Australian mega-fires on platypus occupancy. Biological Conservation 286, 110219.
McColl-Gausden EF, Weeks AR, Coleman R, Song S, Tingley R. 2023. Using hierarchical models to compare the sensitivity of metabarcoding and qPCR for eDNA detection. Ecological Informatics 75, 102072.
Coutts A, O’Brien A, Weeks AR, Swearer SE, van Rooyen A, et al. 2022. An environmental DNA approach to informing restoration of the functionally extinct oyster, Ostrea angasi. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 32, 1732-1744.
Coleman RA, Chee YE, Bond NR, Weeks A, Griffiths J, Serena M, Williams GA, Walsh CJ. 2022. Understanding and managing the interactive impacts of growth in urban land use and climate change on freshwater biota: a case study using the platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus). Global Change Biology 28, 1287-1300.
Tingley R, Gecse NN, Coleman R, van Rooyen A, Weeks AR. 2021. Accounting for false positive errors in occupancy studies based on environmental DNA. Environmental DNA 3, 388-397.
Pirtle EI, van Rooyen AR, Maino J, Weeks AR, Umina PA. 2021. A molecular method for biomonitoring of an exotic plant-pest: leafmining for environmental DNA. Molecular Ecology 30, 4913-4925.
van Rooyen A, Miller AD, Clark Z, Sherman CDH, Butcher PA, Rizzari JR, Weeks AR. 2021. Development of an environmental DNA assay for detecting multiple shark species involved in human-shark conflicts in Australia. Environmental DNA 3, 940-949.
McColl-Gausden EF, Weeks AR, Coleman R, Robinson K, Song S, Raadik T, Tingley R. 2021. Multi-species models reveal that eDNA metabarcoding is more sensitive than backpack electrofishing for conducting fish surveys in freshwater streams Molecular Ecology 30, 3111-3126.
McColl-Gausden E, Weeks AR, Tingley R. 2020. A field ecologist’s guide to environmental DNA sampling in freshwater environments. Australian Zoologist 40, 641.
Tingley R, Greenless M, Oertel S, van Rooyen AR, Weeks AR. 2019. Environmental DNA sampling as a surveillance tool for cane toad Rhinella marina introductions on offshore islands. Biological Invasions 21: 1-6.
Lugg WH, Griffiths J, van Rooyen AR, Weeks AR, Tingley R. 2018. Optimal survey designs for environmental DNA sampling. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 9: 1049-1059.
Guillera-Arroita G, Lahoz-Monfort JJ, van Rooyen AR, Weeks AR, Tingley R. 2017. Dealing with false-positive and false-negative errors about species occurrence at multiple levels. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 8: 1081-1091.
Lahoz-Monfort JJ, Guillera-Arroita G, Tingley R. (2016), Statistical approaches to account for false-positive errors in environmental DNA samples. Molecular Ecology Resources, 16: 673-685.
Smart AS, Weeks AR, van Rooyen AR, Moore A, McCarthy MA, Tingley R. 2016. Assessing the cost-efficiency of environmental DNA sampling. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 7: 1291-1298.
Smart AS, Tingley R, Weeks AR, van Rooyen AR, McCarthy MA. 2015. Environmental DNA sampling is more sensitive than a traditional survey technique for detecting an aquatic invader. Ecological Applications 25: 1944-1952.