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.