To move from research to routine use, we propose a roadmap 🛣️ — focused on implementation in Spain, but adaptable to other regions.

Why do results differ between bulk, eDNA & morphology? 🤔

We show in our article concrete examples from our data of false positives, false negatives & other sources of variability — and propose solutions.

📊 See the summary in the table 👇

💧 eDNA from rivers gave the most divergent results vs. bulk metabarcoding & morphology ID.
👉 Same pattern seen in other studies, even with a different methodology.
⏳ The spatiotemporal scale of the eDNA signal is still unclear — we must understand it better before using it in routine biomonitoring.

In our NW Spain case study, we compared three complementary approaches:

🧪 Bulk (homogenized) tissue metabarcoding
💧 eDNA (water sample) metabarcoding
🔎 Traditional morphological ID

We examined false positives/negatives and other sources of variability driving discrepancies.

In just months, macroinvertebrates recolonised step by step.
📊 DNA metabarcoding + classical ID revealed a rapid shift from pioneer taxa to sensitive EPT groups (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera).
Good ecological status achieved in under 2 years!

Opening the bottom valves of the Matalavilla dam released the first ecological flows in half a century, breathing life back into the Valseco stream.
💧 A simple change, a huge ecological impact.

Creo que croacia es del espacio schengen desde 2023 🤔