DOI: 10.5061/dryad.z8w9ghxp8
title: Data for: A systematic review evaluating the performance of eDNA methods relative to conventional methods for biodiversity monitoring

description: The rapid adoption of environmental DNA (eDNA) methods has drastically
 changed biodiversity monitoring efforts. It is often claimed that eDNA
 methods are more sensitive and efficient than conventional biodiversity
 monitoring methods, however, it is often unclear what metrics are used to
 support this claim. Over the past decade, there have been many direct
 comparative studies between eDNA and conventional methods. While several
 have found support for increased sensitivity and efficiency of eDNA
 methods, others have found the opposite, necessitating a review that
 synthesizes the outcomes of these comparisons. Here, we
 systematically review all comparative studies between eDNA and
 conventional survey methods published between 2008 and 2023. We review the
 various metrics used to evaluate the relative performance of eDNA methods,
 the relative performance of eDNA methods according to those metrics, and
 whether study characteristics influenced the outcome of the comparisons.
 Our review found that eDNA is more likely to provide increased estimates
 of sensitivity metrics, mainly species richness and detection probability.
 They also display lower estimates of efficiency metrics, including cost
 and sampling time/effort. However, despite repeated claims that eDNA
 allows for greater taxonomic resolution by distinguishing cryptic species,
 eDNA methods are more likely to yield lower estimates of taxonomic
 resolution. Trends in comparative outcomes were consistent across study
 environments, target taxa, sampled substrate, and levels of eDNA
 replication. However, we highlight multiple areas that have received
 little exploration into the relative performance of eDNA, including many
 environments of the global south and the ability of eDNA to monitor
 temporal changes in biodiversity. Our review provides a more comprehensive
 examination of eDNA comparative studies and delivers clarity to
 conservation professionals on where, when, and how eDNA methods are likely
 to carry substantial benefits in monitoring biodiversity.
description: This file contains the list of articles used for the systematic
 review, the information obtained from each article, and relevant metadata.
 All articles were obtained from Web of Science or were supplemented from
 the journals <em>Environmental
 DNA,</em> <em>Metabarcoding, and Metagenomics</em>. All
 articles were reviewed by the authors to verify that they met the
 definition of an Environmental DNA comparative study (see text). After
 initial review, articles were QC'd by another author to verify that
 the information was correct.
description: # Data for: A systematic review evaluating the performance of eDNA methods
 relative to conventional methods for biodiversity monitoring
 [https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.z8w9ghxp8](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.z8w9ghxp8) ## Description of the data and file structure All articles were obtained from Web of Science or were supplemented from the journals Environmental DNA, Metabarcoding, and Metagenomics. All articles were reviewed by the authors to verify that they met the definition of an Environmental DNA comparative study (see text). After initial review, articles were QC'd by another author to verify that the information was correct. The first tab contains the metadata listing each field and a definition of each field. The second tab contains all articles and the relevant information that we extracted from each one. ### Files and variables #### File: Iacaruso\_E4\_SupportingInformation\_File1.xlsx **Description:**  ##### Variables * Sheet 1: Metadata pertaining to the review sheet, including a list of all fields, definitions of each field, and other important notes. * Sheet 2: The list of all articles used in the review and all relevant information that we extracted from each article. Cells that are left blank indicate that this information could not be obtained.