Pacific Northwest Research Station

Environmental DNA (eDNA) assays for single‐ and multi‐species detection show promise for providing standardized assessment methods for diverse taxa, but techniques for evaluating multiple taxonomically divergent assemblages are in their infancy. We evaluated whether microfluidic multiplex metabarcoding on the Fluidigm Access Array™ platform and high‐throughput sequencing could identify diverse stream and riparian assemblages from 48 taxon‐general and taxon‐specific metabarcode primers. eDNA screening was paired with electrofishing along a stream continuum to evaluate congruence between methods. A fish hatchery located midway along the stream continuum provided a dispersal barrier, and a point source for non‐native White Sturgeon (Acipencer transmontanus). Microfluidic metabarcoding had 87% accuracy with respect to electrofishing and detected all 13 species electrofishing observed. Taxon‐specific barcoding primers were more successful than taxon‐general universal metabarcoding primers at classifying sequences to species. Both types of markers detected a transition from downstream sites dominated by multiple fish species, to upstream sites dominated by a single species; however, we failed to detect a complementary transition in amphibian occupancy. White Sturgeon was only detected at the hatchery outflow, indicating eDNA transport was not detectable ~2.4 km from its source. Overall, we identified 878 predicted taxa. Most sequences (50.1%) derived from fish (Actinopteri, Petromyzontidae), oomycetes (21.3%), arthropoda (classes Insecta, Decapoda; 16.5%), and apicomplexan parasites (3.8%). Taxa accounting for ~1% or less of sequences included freshwater red algae, diatoms, amphibians, and beaver. Our work shows that microfluidic metabarcoding can survey multiple phyla per assay, providing fine discrimination required to resolve closely related species, and enable data‐driven prioritization for multiple forest health objectives.

This is a guide for the collection of reference samples of trees to enable the identification of species and/or geographical origin of woody material. It is an update of the sampling section of the GTTN standards and guidelines (Ekué 2014) and builds further on a discussion initiated during a workshop held in Hamburg at the Thünen Institute for Wood Research in 2014. If you are looking for support on how to collect test samples, see the UNODC guide (UNODC 2016).
To enable the implementation of the different laws regulating the trade in illegal wood, reference databases for various timber tracking tools are urgently needed for at least the most traded and endangered tree species. The Global Timber Tracking Network (GTTN) is building a central database where not only the reference data can be stored but which will also function as a sample locator. Having a common sampling guide will facilitate meaningful exchange of samples.
In addition, to optimise the use of wood/wood product identification (taxonomic identity or geographic origin) in support of law enforcement, the guide anticipates upcoming developments to combine (Paredes Villanueva 2018) different timber identification methods (Dormontt et al. 2015, Lowe et al. 2016) such as wood anatomy (Koch and Schmitt 2015, Helmling et al. 2018), DNA-based methods (Jolivet and Degen 2012, Blanc-Jolivet et al. 2018, Chaves et al. 2018), stable isotopes (Paredes-Villanueva et al. in preparation, Vlam et al. 2018), DART TOFMS (Lancaster and Espinoza 2012, Espinoza et al. 2015, Deklerck et al. 2017, Paredes-Villanueva et al. 2018) and NIRS (Pastore et al. 2011, Bergo et al. 2016, Snel et al. 2018). This sampling guide is written to make sharing of samples between researchers specialised in different timber tracking methods possible, as samples should ideally come from the same location in the tree, from the same individual and from well-identified trees when combining methods.

This guide is intended for scientists, to provide all the information needed to get the most out of sampling campaigns for timber identification purposes. This information should allow setting up a sampling protocol adapted to the specific goal of the research project, the conditions of the sampling area and the background of the people who will do the sampling. Note that this guide is to collect reference samples and hence relatively high amounts of samples from different individuals are needed to take the variability of a species into account. Once reference data have been developed for a tree species for one or more identification methods, however, only one sample of an unidentified wooden object is often sufficient to determine its identity

The Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) has guided the management of 17 federal forests in the US Pacific Northwest for the past 25 years. The existing management plans for these national forests – which were amended by the NWFP – are now being evaluated for revision under the US Forest Service’s 2012 planning rule. To help inform federal land managers, we reviewed the scientific literature published since the inception of the NWFP and report several key findings: (1) conservation of at-risk species within national forests is challenging in the face of threats that are beyond the control of federal managers, (2) management efforts to promote resilience to wildfire and climate change include restoring dynamics and structure at multiple scales and revisiting reserve design, (3) forest restoration can have an ecological and socioeconomic win–win outcome, (4) human communities benefit from many ecosystem services beyond the supply of timber, (5) collaboration among multiple stakeholders is essential for achieving ecological and socioeconomic goals, and (6) monitoring and adaptive management are crucial to learning about and addressing uncertainty.