Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31511786›Full record

ArticleMethods in ecology and evolution2019

Empowering conservation practice with efficient and economical genotyping from poor quality samples.

Meghana Natesh, Ryan W Taylor, Nathan K Truelove, Elizabeth A Hadly, Stephen R Palumbi, Dmitri A Petrov, Uma Ramakrishnan

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in ecology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The year of the tiger and the year of tiger genomes!Molecular ecology resources · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. High frequency of an otherwise rare phenotype in a small and isolated tiger population.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Meghana NateshNational Centre for Biological Sciences, TIFR, Bangalore, India.
Ryan W TaylorDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Nathan K TrueloveHopkins Marine Station, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, California.
Elizabeth A HadlyDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Stephen R PalumbiDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Dmitri A PetrovDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Uma RamakrishnanNational Centre for Biological Sciences, TIFR, Bangalore, India.
Stanford University · USNational Centre for Biological Sciences · INPacific University · US

Funding

Genomics of rapid adaptation in the lab and in the wildR35GM118165 · NIGMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Dmitri Petrov · 2016 to 2026
$8.3M
Cost effective high-quality genome assembly for non-model organismsR43HG009482 · NHGRI · END2END GENOMICS, LLC · PI TAYLOR, RYAN WALDO · 2017 to 2017
$204k
NHGRI NIH HHS R43 HG009482NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM118165Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Moderate- to high-density genotyping (100 + SNPs) is widely used to determine and measure individual identity, relatedness, fitness, population structure and migration in wild populations.However, these important tools are difficult to apply when high-quality genetic material is unavailable. Most genomic tools are developed for high-quality DNA sources from laboratory or medical settings. As a result, most genetic data from market or field settings is limited to easily amplified mitochondrial DNA or a few microsatellites.To enable genotyping in conservation contexts, we used next-generation sequencing of multiplex PCR products from very low-quality DNA extracted from faeces, hair and cooked samples. We demonstrated utility and wide-ranging potential application in endangered wild tigers and tracking commercial trade in Caribbean queen conch.We genotyped 100 SNPs from degraded tiger samples to identify individuals, discern close relatives and detect population differentiation. Co-occurring carnivores do not amplify (e.g. Indian wild dog/dhole) or are monomorphic (e.g. leopard). Sixty-two SNPs from conch fritters and field-collected samples were used to test relatedness and detect population structure.We provide proof of concept for a rapid, simple, cost-effective and scalable method (for both samples and number of loci), a framework that can be applied to other conservation scenarios previously limited by low-quality DNA samples. These approaches provide a critical advance for wildlife monitoring and forensics, open the door to field-ready testing, and will strengthen the use of science in policy decisions and wildlife trade.

Indexed as

conchconservation geneticsendangered species monitoring genotypingmultiplex PCRnoninvasive samplesSNPstigers

Identifiers

PMID31511786
PMCPMC6738957
OpenAlexW2949351642

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.