Insights into the representativeness of biodiversity assessment in large reservoir through eDNA metabarcoding

Data curation: Thaina´ Cortez, Andre´ Torres. Formal analysis: Thaina´ Cortez, Andre´ Torres, Marcelo Cabral, Gabriel Zielinsky. Funding acquisition: Danielle do Amaral, Mauro Rebelo. Investigation: Thaina´ Cortez, Andre´ Torres, Murilo Guimarães, Henrique Pinheiro, Camila Pereira, Giovanni de Castro, Luana Guerreiro, Juliana Americo, Danielle do Amaral, Mauro Rebelo. Methodology: Thaina´ Cortez, Andre´ Torres, Murilo Guimarães, Henrique Pinheiro, Marcelo Cabral, Gabriel Zielinsky, Juliana Americo, Danielle do Amaral. Project administration: Juliana Americo, Danielle do Amaral, Mauro Rebelo. Resources: Danielle do Amaral, Mauro Rebelo. Supervision: Juliana Americo, Danielle do Amaral, Mauro Rebelo. Validation: Henrique Pinheiro, Camila Pereira, Giovanni de Castro, Luana Guerreiro, Mauro Rebelo. Visualization: Thaina´ Cortez, Murilo Guimarães, Henrique Pinheiro, Camila Pereira, Gio- vanni de Castro, Luana Guerreiro, Danielle do Amaral. Writing – original draft: Thaina´ Cortez. Writing – review & editing: Thaina´ Cortez, Andre´ Torres, Murilo Guimarães, Henrique Pin- heiro, Marcelo Cabral, Gabriel Zielinsky, Camila Pereira, Giovanni de Castro, Luana Guer- reiro, Juliana Americo, Danielle do Amaral, Mauro Rebelo. References 1. Gu W, Swihart RK (2004) Absent or undetected? Effects of non-detection of species occurrence on wildlife—habitat models. Biol Conserv 116:195–203 2. Ma¨chler E, Deiner K, Steinmann P, Altermatt F (2014) Utility of environmental DNA for monitoring rare and indicator macroinvertebrate species. Freshwater Science 33:1174–1183

3. Laramie MB, Pilliod DS, Goldberg CS (2015) Characterizing the distribution of an endangered salmonid using environmental DNA analysis. Biol Conserv 183:29–37 4. Handley LL (2015) How will the ‘molecular revolution’ contribute to biological recording? Biological Jour- nal of the Linnean Society 115:750–766 5. de Faria LC, Domenico M Di, Andrade SCS, dos Santos MC, Fonseca G, Zanol J, Amaral ACZ (2018) The use of metabarcoding for meiofauna ecological patterns assessment. Mar Environ Res 140:160– 168 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2018.06.013 PMID: 29933903 6. Schwentner M, Zahiri R, Yamamoto S, Husemann M, Kullmann B, Thiel R (2021) eDNA as a tool for non-invasive monitoring of the fauna of a turbid, well-mixed system, the Elbe estuary in Germany. PLoS One 16:e0250452 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250452 PMID: 33861810 7. Manandhar P, Manandhar S, Sherchan AM, et al (2023) Environmental DNA (eDNA) based fish biodi- versity assessment of two Himalayan rivers of Nepal reveals diversity differences and highlights new species distribution records. PLOS Water 2:e0000099 8. Erős T, Funk A, Pont D, Hein T, Meulenbroek P, Preiszner B, et al (2024) eDNA metabarcoding reveals the role of habitat specialization and spatial and environmental variability in shaping diversity patterns of fish metacommunities. PLoS One 19:e0296310 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0296310 PMID: 38165893 9. Harrison JB, Sunday JM, Rogers SM (2019) Predicting the fate of eDNA in the environment and implica-

tions for studying biodiversity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 286:20191409 https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.1409 PMID: 31744434 10. Barnes MA, Turner CR (2016) The ecology of environmental DNA and implications for conservation genetics. Conservation Genetics 17:1–17 PLOS ONE eDNA metabarcoding reservoir PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0314210 January 24, 2025 19 / 22