# Evaluation of nanopore sequencing for increasing accessibility of eDNA studies in biodiverse countries

**Authors:** Daniel Gygax, Sabina Ramirez, Moses Chibesa, Twakundine Simpamba, Michael Riffel, Tom Riffel, Amrita Srivathsan, Reindert Nijland, Lara Urban, Mizanur Rahman, Mizanur Rahman, Mizanur Rahman

PMC · DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0333994 · PLOS One · 2025-10-16

## TL;DR

This study shows that portable nanopore sequencing can enable biodiversity monitoring in remote areas, offering a feasible alternative to traditional methods.

## Contribution

The study demonstrates the feasibility of using nanopore sequencing for eDNA metabarcoding in remote field conditions.

## Key findings

- Nanopore sequencing can match or exceed Illumina in vertebrate eDNA metabarcoding.
- eDNA and camera trap methods detect different species, suggesting complementary use.
- The eDNA workflow was successfully implemented in a mobile lab in Zambia.

## Abstract

Biodiversity loss is a global challenge of the 21st century. Environmental DNA (eDNA)-based metabarcoding offers a cost- and time-efficient alternative to conventional biodiversity surveys, enabling detection of rare, cryptic, and elusive species from environmental samples. However, limited access to genomic technologies restricts the application of eDNA metabarcoding in highly biodiverse remote regions and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Here, we directly compared the latest portable nanopore sequencing methods with established Illumina sequencing for vertebrate eDNA metabarcoding of Zambian water samples. Our results show that due to recent improvements in sequencing chemistry and optimized basecalling, nanopore sequencing data can recapitulate or even surpass established protocols, demonstrating the feasibility of in situ biodiversity assessments. eDNA- and camera trap-based species detections had minimal overlap in species detections, suggesting a complementary rather than substituting application of these biodiversity monitoring technologies. We finally demonstrate that our entire eDNA workflow can be successfully implemented in a mobile laboratory under remote field conditions by completing all steps—from sample collection to data analysis—within the Luambe National Park in Zambia. This approach has important implications for capacity building in LMICs and for overcoming limitations associated with sample export.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** CAM (MESH:D020786), ACADEMIC EDITOR (MESH:D007859)
- **Chemicals:** agarose (MESH:D012685), PONE-D-25-24113R1 (-), PES (MESH:C022840), MgCl2 (MESH:D015636), silica gel (MESH:D058428), water (MESH:D014867)
- **Species:** Kobus vardonii (puku, species) [taxon 59533], Chlorocebus pygerythrus (vervet, species) [taxon 60710], Papio cynocephalus (baboon, species) [taxon 9556], Chiroptera (bats, order) [taxon 9397], Aepyceros melampus (impala, species) [taxon 9897], Xenopus laevis (African clawed frog, species) [taxon 8355], Xenopus sp. (clawed frog, species) [taxon 8356], Kobus ellipsiprymnus (waterbuck, species) [taxon 9962], Hippopotamus amphibius (hippopotamus, species) [taxon 9833], Tragelaphus scriptus (bushbuck, species) [taxon 66440], Loxodonta africana (African bush elephant, species) [taxon 9785], Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12530551/full.md

## Figures

5 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12530551/full.md

## References

52 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12530551/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12530551