Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30699177›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Improving cost-efficiency of faecal genotyping: New tools for elephant species.

Stéphanie Bourgeois, Jenny Kaden, Helen Senn, Nils Bunnefeld, Kathryn J Jeffery, Etienne F Akomo-Okoue, Rob Ogden, Ross McEwing

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Stéphanie BourgeoisAgence Nationale des Parcs Nationaux, Libreville, Gabon.ORCID 0000-0003-1218-8912
Jenny KadenWildGenes Laboratory, The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, RZSS Edinburgh Zoo, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Helen SennWildGenes Laboratory, The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, RZSS Edinburgh Zoo, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Nils BunnefeldBiological and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom.
Kathryn J JefferyAgence Nationale des Parcs Nationaux, Libreville, Gabon.
Etienne F Akomo-OkoueInstitut de Recherche en Écologie Tropicale, Libreville, Gabon.
Rob OgdenTRACE Wildlife Forensics Network, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Ross McEwingTRACE Wildlife Forensics Network, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Royal Zoological Society of Scotland · GBUniversity of Stirling · GBInstitut Africain d'Informatique · GA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the critical need for non-invasive tools to improve monitoring of wildlife populations, especially for endangered and elusive species, faecal genetic sampling has not been adopted as regular practice, largely because of the associated technical challenges and cost. Substantial work needs to be undertaken to refine sample collection and preparation methods in order to improve sample set quality and provide cost-efficient tools that can effectively support wildlife management. In this study, we collected an extensive set of forest elephant (Loxodonta cyclotis) faecal samples throughout Gabon, Central Africa, and prepared them for genotyping using 107 single-nucleotide polymorphism assays. We developed a new quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay targeting a 130-bp nuclear DNA fragment and demonstrated its suitability for degraded samples in all three elephant species. Using this assay to compare the efficacy of two sampling methods for faecal DNA recovery, we found that sampling the whole surface of a dung pile with a swab stored in a small tube of lysis buffer was a convenient method producing high extraction success and DNA yield. We modelled the influence of faecal quality and storage time on DNA concentration in order to provide recommendations for optimized collection and storage. The maximum storage time to ensure 75% success was two months for samples collected within 24 hours after defecation and extended to four months for samples collected within one hour. Lastly, the real-time quantitative PCR assay allowed us to predict genotyping success and pre-screen DNA samples, thus further increasing the cost-efficiency of our approach. We recommend combining the validation of an efficient sampling method, the build of in-country DNA extraction capacity for reduced storage time and the development of species-specific quantitative PCR assays in order to increase the cost-efficiency of routine non-invasive DNA analyses and expand the use of next-generation markers to non-invasive samples.

Indexed as

AnimalsCost-Benefit AnalysisDNAElephantsFecesGabonGenotypeReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionDNA

Identifiers

PMID30699177
PMCPMC6353156
OpenAlexW2914791401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.