Figure legends
Figure 1. Summary of our literature search in the meta-analysis
according to the PRISMA statement. We compiled all the eDNA studies
collected in the previous review article (Jo et al., 2021) (N = 728) and
additionally searched for the eDNA studies published in this year (N =
195). By reading the abstracts of them, we retained 118 literature
describing the relationship between eDNA quantity and species abundance.
We further carefully read the full-texts of the remaining literature and
finally included 56 literature in the meta-analysis.
Figure 2. Comparison of R2 values among the target
taxa (a) and study environments (b). Circles and error bars represent
the mean R2 values and their 95 % CIs estimated by
the forest plots (Figure S3). The gray dotted line shows
R2 = 0. Numerals in parentheses mean the number of
individual R2 values required for each plot.
Figure 3. R2 values (a) and Fisher’s z values (b) with
relation to filter pore sizes used for water filtration. The size of
each plot represents the sample size required to calculate original
R2 values in each individual study. The regression
line is based on the result of the meta-regression analysis.
Figure 4. The asymmetry funnel plot showing the publication bias in this
study.