Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31170908›Full record

ArticleBMC genetics2019

Identification and evaluation of a core microsatellite panel for use in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus).

William L Miller, Jessie Edson, Peter Pietrandrea, Cassandra Miller-Butterworth, W David Walter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. SNP-RFLP Markers for the Study ofEcology and evolution · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. GigaByte (Hong Kong, China) · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Seasonal resource partitioning between neighboring cougars in a multiprey system.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    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

5 authors.

William L MillerPennsylvania Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Ecosystem Science and Management, Intercollege Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. wm25@calvin.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9957-1211
Jessie EdsonPennsylvania Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Peter PietrandreaPenn State Beaver, Monaca, PA, USA.
Cassandra Miller-ButterworthPenn State Beaver, Monaca, PA, USA.
W David WalterU.S. Geological Survey, Pennsylvania Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicrosatellite loci have been used extensively over the past two decades to study the genetic characteristics of non-model species. The ease of microsatellite development and ability to adapt markers from related species has led to the proliferation of available markers for many commonly studied species. Because it is often infeasible to genotype individuals across all available loci, researchers generally rely on subsets of markers. Marker choice can bias inferences made using disparate suites of loci. This has been a primary motivation for efforts to identify uniform marker panels. Here, we use the geographic distribution of previous studies to identify microsatellite loci for white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) with the potential for widespread use, and we evaluate the effectiveness of this panel in a portion of the range where few previous studies have been conducted. The purpose was to consolidate the numerous genetic resources for this species into a manageable panel and to provide a uniform methodology that improves comparisons between past and future studies.

resultsWe reviewed microsatellite panels from 58 previous or ongoing projects and identified 106 candidate loci. We developed a multiplex protocol and evaluated the efficacy of 17 of the most commonly used loci using 720 DNA samples collected from the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States of America. Amplification errors were detected in six of these loci. The 11 remaining loci were highly polymorphic, exhibited low frequencies of null alleles, and were easy to interpret with the aid of allele binning software.

conclusionsThe development of broadly-applicable, core microsatellite panels has the potential to improve repeatability and comparative ability for commonly studied species. The properties of the consolidated 11 microsatellite panel suggest that they are applicable for many common research objectives for white-tailed deer. The geographic distribution of previous studies using these markers provides a greater degree of confidence regarding the robustness to common sources of error related to amplification anomalies, such as null alleles, relative to loci with more limited use. While this does not replace further evaluation of genotyping errors, it does provide a common platform that benefits future research studies.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularMicrosatellite RepeatsAllelesAnimalsDeerGenetic VariationGenotypeQuantitative Trait LociUnited StatesMicrosatellitesOdocoileus virginianusPanel evaluationShort-tandem repeatsWhite-tailed deer

Identifiers

PMID31170908
PMCPMC6554959

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.