How far is environmental DNA monitoring from routine use by regulators and conservation bodies?

The road so far

1 of 5 steps done, 2 in progress.

1. Done · 18 May 2023Water eDNA test used for great crested newt surveys in England

   Natural England's protocol for great crested newt eDNA from pond water is set out in technical advice note WC1067. Theroux and colleagues (2025) describe WC1067 as Natural England's national formal standard for great crested newt qPCR analyses. Natural England's 2023 evidence review (NECR476) decided that more evidence was required before any change to the protocol. [1][3]

2. In progress · 2025Natural England decision on filtration in place of ethanol precipitation

   Harper and colleagues (2025) compared filtration with the approved ethanol precipitation step in 25 ponds, sampled monthly from April to October 2022. Filtration detection was comparable to or higher than ethanol precipitation. The sources reviewed show no Natural England decision to change the protocol. [2][1]

3. In progress · 13 Feb 2025International standard for sampling and preserving eDNA from water

   A 2025 review says that CEN EN 17805:2023 covers sampling, capture and preservation of eDNA from water, and that the ISO edition was under development. The sources reviewed do not confirm whether the ISO edition has been published, so its status is not confirmed here. [3]

4. Not startedReliable abundance estimates from eDNA in natural water bodies

   In controlled flow-through tanks with three fish species, eDNA concentration rose with fish biomass in a moderate-to-high but nonlinear way. The authors advise that eDNA-based biomass estimates should not assume linearity. Occupancy surveys of ponds show presence or absence, not numbers, and the sources reviewed show no validated field method for abundance. [5][4]

5. Not startedAirborne eDNA measurement standards for regulatory decisions

   Airborne eDNA is at research stage. A zoo study detected 49 vertebrate species from air filters using metabarcoding, and detection was more likely for animals nearer the sampler and with greater biomass. A 2026 review of 245 eDNA studies found 12 that used air, and noted that air sampling needs more labour and time than soil or water sampling. A UK project run by NPL with the National Measurement Laboratory at LGC, funded by DSIT, plans candidate reference materials and interlaboratory comparisons. It states no regulatory use or timeline. [6][7][8]

Why it matters

Surveys that use DNA traces instead of catching or seeing animals could cover more ground for less effort. Regulators and conservation bodies need methods they can defend in a licence decision, so the gaps in error rates, standards and quantification decide how far the method can replace or supplement traditional surveys.

What stands in the way

• The approved great crested newt protocol still specifies ethanol precipitation. The 2025 filtration study has not, in the sources reviewed, led to a change.
• Single results carry measurable error rates. Buxton and colleagues estimated a 5.2% false-negative rate for pond sample collection and a 1.5% field false-positive rate, and a laboratory false-positive rate of about 2% per qPCR replicate.
• Abundance cannot yet be read reliably from eDNA concentration, because the tank relationship is nonlinear and has not been tested in natural waters.
• The ISO water sampling standard was under development at the time of a 2025 review, and its publication status is not confirmed here.
• The sources reviewed show no national biomonitoring programme that uses eDNA for routine regulatory decisions beyond the great crested newt protocol. This search did not establish whether one exists.
• Airborne eDNA has no agreed reference materials or procedures yet. The NPL project launched in November 2025 to develop candidate reference materials and reference procedures.

Signals to watch

• Natural England publishes a decision on whether to accept filtration for great crested newt eDNA surveys.
• The final ISO water eDNA standard is published and adopted by national standards bodies and regulators.
• Field tests that compare eDNA concentration with counted animals in natural ponds, rivers or lakes.
• NPL and the National Measurement Laboratory publish airborne eDNA reference materials or interlaboratory comparison results.
• A UK regulator accepts eDNA results under a published protocol for a species group other than great crested newts.

Sources

1. government report
   An evidence review for great crested newt eDNA monitoring protocols (NECR476)
   Natural England, 18 May 2023.
2. peer reviewed paper
   Extending sampling approaches for great crested newt (Triturus cristatus) eDNA monitoring
   Lynsey R. Harper, Kirsten J. Harper, Suzie Platts et al.. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, 2025.
3. review article
   What is eDNA method standardisation and why do we need it?
   Susanna Theroux, Adam Sepulveda, Cathryn L. Abbott et al.. Metabarcoding and Metagenomics, 13 Feb 2025.
4. peer reviewed paper
   Reliability of environmental DNA surveys to detect pond occupancy by newts at a national scale
   A. Buxton, A. Diana, E. Matechou et al.. Scientific Reports, 25 Jan 2022.
5. peer reviewed paper
   Controlled Experiments Reveal Moderate, Nonlinear Relationships Between eDNA Concentration and Fish Biomass in Three Freshwater Species of Monitoring Relevance
   Lorenzo Talarico, Gerardo Petrosino, Anna Rita Rossi et al.. Ecology and Evolution, 17 Feb 2026.
6. peer reviewed paper
   Airborne environmental DNA for terrestrial vertebrate community monitoring
   C. Lynggaard, M. F. Bertelsen, C. V. Jensen et al.. Current Biology, 6 Jan 2022.
7. review article
   Properties and Limitations of eDNA Substrates for Terrestrial Animal Monitoring
   Beilun Zhao, Tobias Andermann. Molecular Ecology Resources, 23 Jan 2026.
8. news
   UK launches initiative to advance measurement science for airborne eDNA for biodiversity monitoring
   National Physical Laboratory (NPL), 3 Nov 2025.

Last reviewed 21 Oct 2026.