A Simple Passive Sampler Reveals Airborne eDNA Sampling and Processing Trade‐Offs
- 1National Research Collections Australia, Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia
Abstract
Airborne environmental DNA (eDNA) is an emerging tool for biodiversity assessment, enabling the detection of organisms from biological particles suspended in the air. Recent studies have demonstrated its potential for detecting diverse taxonomic groups, with applications in conservation, biosecurity, and ecological monitoring. However, given the early stage of development and the diversity of collection approaches, it remains unclear how key sampling design parameters influence airborne eDNA collection, detection, and ecological inference. Here, we use a simple, low‐cost, 3D‐printable passive collection device to systematically evaluate the effects of filter surface area, sampling duration, and post‐collection storage on target‐species detection and community recovery. Using species‐specific qPCR targeting European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus), shingleback lizard (Tiliqua rugosa), and tiger (Panthera tigris), alongside general vertebrate 12SV5 and mammal‐specific Mam1/2 metabarcoding, we found that smaller filters generally improved detection sensitivity, recovered signal increased rapidly over short deployment periods before showing diminishing gains, and dry storage for 28 days had only modest effects on detection outcomes. Zoo deployments recovered ecologically plausible signals, although zoo‐held taxa were detected inconsistently across replicate filters. Together, these findings demonstrate that sampling design can substantially influence detection within passive airborne eDNA workflows and provide practical guidance for developing scalable and reproducible monitoring strategies.
Related
- Toward Repurposing Global Passive Air Sampling Networks for Insect Monitoring: Promises and Pitfalls of Airborne eDNA
- AberTrap: an open-source, lightweight, programmable sampler of airborne biological particles
- GNMCADS: Sampling For Protein Conformation Diversity With Gaussian Network Model Guided Condition Annealed Diffusion Sampler
- Car-Mounted Airborne eDNA Sampling Detects Landscape Scale Biodiversity Turnover Along Environmental Gradients.
- City life: airborne DNA metagenomic biodiversity monitoring reveals dynamic changes across time and space
BibTeX
@article{tulloch2026simple,
title = {{A Simple Passive Sampler Reveals Airborne eDNA Sampling and Processing Trade‐Offs}},
author = {Rachel L. Tulloch and Nunzio Knerr and Erin E. Hahn},
journal = {Environmental DNA},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.1002/edn3.70384},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/edn3.70384},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - A Simple Passive Sampler Reveals Airborne eDNA Sampling and Processing Trade‐Offs
AU - Rachel L. Tulloch
AU - Nunzio Knerr
AU - Erin E. Hahn
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/01
JO - Environmental DNA
DO - 10.1002/edn3.70384
UR - https://doi.org/10.1002/edn3.70384
AB - Airborne environmental DNA (eDNA) is an emerging tool for biodiversity assessment, enabling the detection of organisms from biological particles suspended in the air. Recent studies have demonstrated its potential for detecting diverse taxonomic groups, with applications in conservation, biosecurity, and ecological monitoring. However, given the early stage of development and the diversity of collection approaches, it remains unclear how key sampling design parameters influence airborne eDNA collection, detection, and ecological inference. Here, we use a simple, low‐cost, 3D‐printable passive collection device to systematically evaluate the effects of filter surface area, sampling duration, and post‐collection storage on target‐species detection and community recovery. Using species‐specific qPCR targeting European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus), shingleback lizard (Tiliqua rugosa), and tiger (Panthera tigris), alongside general vertebrate 12SV5 and mammal‐specific Mam1/2 metabarcoding, we found that smaller filters generally improved detection sensitivity, recovered signal increased rapidly over short deployment periods before showing diminishing gains, and dry storage for 28 days had only modest effects on detection outcomes. Zoo deployments recovered ecologically plausible signals, although zoo‐held taxa were detected inconsistently across replicate filters. Together, these findings demonstrate that sampling design can substantially influence detection within passive airborne eDNA workflows and provide practical guidance for developing scalable and reproducible monitoring strategies.
SN - 2637-4943
ER -