Environmental DNA sampling is more sensitive than a traditional survey technique for detecting an aquatic invader

Effective management of alien species requires detecting populations in the early stages of invasion. Environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling can detect aquatic species at relatively low densities, but few studies have directly compared detection probabilities of eDNA sampling with those of traditional sampling methods. We compare the ability of a traditional sampling technique (bottle trapping) and eDNA to detect a recently established invader, the smooth newt Lissotriton vulgaris vulgaris , at seven field sites in Melbourne, Australia. Over a four‐month period, per‐trap detection probabilities ranged from 0.01 to 0.26 among sites where L. v. vulgaris was detected, whereas per‐sample eDNA estimates were much higher (0.29–1.0). Detection probabilities of both methods varied temporally (across days and months), but temporal variation appeared to be uncorrelated between methods. Only estimates of spatial variation were strongly correlated across the two sampling techniques. Environmental variables (water depth, rainfall, ambient temperature) were not clearly correlated with detection probabilities estimated via trapping, whereas eDNA detection probabilities were negatively correlated with water depth, possibly reflecting higher eDNA concentrations at lower water levels. Our findings demonstrate that eDNA sampling can be an order of magnitude more sensitive than traditional methods, and illustrate that traditional‐ and eDNA‐based surveys can provide independent information on species distributions when occupancy surveys are conducted over short timescales.