Environmental nucleic acids: A field‐based comparison for monitoring freshwater habitats using eDNA and eRNA

Nucleic acids released by organisms and isolated from environmental substrates are increasingly being used for molecular biomonitoring. While environmental DNA (eDNA) has received much attention, the potential of environmental RNA as a biomonitoring tool remains under‐explored. Several recent studies using paired DNA and RNA metabarcoding of bulk samples suggest that RNA might better reflect “metabolically active” parts of the community. However, such studies mainly capture organismal eDNA and eRNA. For larger eukaryotes, isolation of extra‐organismal RNA will be important, but viability needs to be examined in a field‐based setting. In this study we evaluate (a) whether extra‐organismal eRNA release from macroeukaryotes can be detected given its supposedly rapid degradation, and (b) if the same field collection methods for eDNA can be applied to eRNA. We collected eDNA and eRNA from water in lakes where fish community composition is well documented, enabling a comparison between the two nucleic acids in two different seasons with monitoring using conventional methods. We found that eRNA is released from macroeukaryotes and can be filtered from water and metabarcoded in a similar manner as eDNA to reliably provide species composition information. eRNA had a small but significantly greater true positive rate than eDNA, indicating that it correctly detects more species known to exist in the lakes. Given relatively small differences between the two molecules in describing fish community composition, we conclude that if eRNA provides significant advantages in terms of lability, it is a strong candidate to add to the suite of molecular monitoring tools.