@article{fdi:010097147,
  title = {{A}ctive versus passive e{DNA} sampling across depths at a tropical {F}ish-{A}ggregating {D}evice ({FAD})},
  author = {{M}artino, {F}. and {H}artaty, {H}. and {C}robe, {V}. and {H}utapea, {J}. and {L}amy, {T}homas and {P}oloni, {G}. and {S}oria, {M}arc and {S}piga, {M}. and {Z}ane, {L}. and {W}udianto, {W}. and {C}apello, {M}anuela and {C}ongiu, {L}.},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{E}nvironmental {DNA} (e{DNA}) is a valuable tool for monitoring fish biodiversity, particularly in pelagic environments, where conventional methods are difficult to implement. {F}ish aggregating devices ({FAD}s), floating structures widely used by tropical tuna fishers, are known to attract numerous pelagic fish species, making them ideal sampling locations. {I}n this study, we assessed pelagic fish diversity at a {FAD} off the coast of {B}ali, {I}ndonesia, using e{DNA} metabarcoding. {W}e compared different e{DNA} sampling strategies with the primary aim of evaluating the effectiveness of e{DNA} metabarcoding for assessing pelagic fish biodiversity, while testing and refining accessible, low-cost protocols suitable for remote and logistically constrained environments. {S}ampling was conducted over three consecutive days at four depths (1, 10, 40, and 60 m) using two distinct e{DNA} collection methods: active filtration and a custom-designed passive system consisting of 3{D}-printed cylinders filled with sterile gauze, mounted on unit holders that allow the simultaneous deployment of triplicate samples at each depth. {A} total of 66 samples were collected, and metabarcoding was performed using an available primer pair targeting fish 12{S} mitochondrial {DNA}, with sequencing performed on an {I}llumina {N}ova{S}eq platform. {A}cross both sampling methods, a total of 39 fish {O}perational {T}axonomic {U}nits ({OTU}s) were detected, of which 25 were shared between active and passive approaches, and 31 were assigned to the species level. {T}he two sampling methods yield overlapping assemblages dominated by epipelagic taxa commonly reported at {FAD}s, indicating that both approaches are suitable for characterizing fish communities in this environment. {I}mportantly, the integration of passive and active sampling provided a practical balance between deployment flexibility and taxonomic detection. {B}eyond technical validation, standardized e{DNA} protocols can be effectively transferred and applied in contexts where logistical constraints are extremely relevant, thereby supporting the development of biodiversity monitoring programs centered around ecologically relevant features such as {FAD}s.},
  keywords = {environmental {DNA} ; fish aggregating devices ({FAD}s) ; {I}ndo-{P}acific region ; tropical pelagic monitoring},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{E}nvironmental {DNA}},
  volume = {8},
  numero = {3},
  pages = {e70307 [17 p.]},
  ISSN = {2637-4943},
  year = {2026},
  DOI = {10.1002/edn3.70307},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010097147},
}