Dr Mieke van der Heyde1,2, Professor Michael Bunce2, Associate Professor Grant Wardell-Johnson1,2, Dr Nicole White2, Ms Kristen Fernandes1,2, Professor Kingsley Dixon1, Dr Paul Nevill1,2
1ARC Centre for Mine Site Restoration, School of Molecular and Life Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia, 2Trace and Environmental DNA (TrEnD) Laboratory, School of Molecular and Life Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia
Monitoring is critical to mine site restoration to track trajectories, enable adaptive management, and demonstrate achievement of goals. However, traditional monitoring approaches are time-consuming and expensive, and so are rarely undertaken effectively. Application of molecular tools has made important contributions to understanding restoration success, and eDNA metabarcoding is a relatively recent tool to monitor ecosystem recovery. Here, we discuss our application of eDNA metabarcoding to monitoring biodiversity recovery in the Pilbara, Swan Coastal Plain and Jarrah Forest. Implementing eDNA-based surveys in restoration monitoring requires informed design, including understanding of the local environment and the ecology of target taxa in choice of suitable biological substrate. Many variables in sample design, including spatial heterogeneity, reference sites, replication, and sampling protocols can introduce variability and reduce repeatability of surveys or studies. The selection of a suitable metabarcoding assay depends on the target(s) of the survey, and the robustness of reference barcodes. Finally, recognition of the biases and limitations of eDNA methodologies are required to interpret the data and generate robust inferences. DNA-based biomonitoring of ecological restoration can increase the scope of biomonitoring, but requires consideration of survey design and sample storage over multi-year timescales.
Biography:
Biographies to come