Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34407764›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2021

First core microsatellite panel identification in Apennine brown bears (Ursus arctos marsicanus): a collaborative approach.

Erminia Scarpulla, Alessio Boattini, Mario Cozzo, Patrizia Giangregorio, Paolo Ciucci, Nadia Mucci, Ettore Randi, Francesca Davoli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Erminia ScarpullaDepartment of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences (BiGeA), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Alessio BoattiniDepartment of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences (BiGeA), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Mario CozzoDepartment for the Monitoring and Protection of the Environment and for Biodiversity Conservation, Unit for Conservation Genetics (BIO-CGE), Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), Via Ca' Fornacetta, 9 - 40064 Ozzano dell'Emilia, Bologna, Italy.
Patrizia GiangregorioDepartment for the Monitoring and Protection of the Environment and for Biodiversity Conservation, Unit for Conservation Genetics (BIO-CGE), Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), Via Ca' Fornacetta, 9 - 40064 Ozzano dell'Emilia, Bologna, Italy.
Paolo CiucciDepartment of Biology and Biotechnology "Charles Darwin" (BBCD), Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Nadia MucciDepartment for the Monitoring and Protection of the Environment and for Biodiversity Conservation, Unit for Conservation Genetics (BIO-CGE), Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), Via Ca' Fornacetta, 9 - 40064 Ozzano dell'Emilia, Bologna, Italy.
Ettore RandiFaculty of Engineering and Science, Department of Chemistry and Bioscience, University of Aalborg, Aalborg, Denmark.
Francesca DavoliDepartment for the Monitoring and Protection of the Environment and for Biodiversity Conservation, Unit for Conservation Genetics (BIO-CGE), Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), Via Ca' Fornacetta, 9 - 40064 Ozzano dell'Emilia, Bologna, Italy. francesca.davoli@isprambiente.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3231-2415

Funding

PNALM Research Project No. L00CGE11 - CUP C36C18000460005PNM Research Project No. L00CGE11 - CUP C36C18000460005Regione Lazio Research Project No. L00CGE18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe low cost and rapidity of microsatellite analysis have led to the development of several markers for many species. Because in non-invasive genetics it is recommended to genotype individuals using few loci, generally a subset of markers is selected. The choice of different marker panels by different research groups studying the same population can cause problems and bias in data analysis. A priority issue in conservation genetics is the comparability of data produced by different labs with different methods. Here, we compared data from previous and ongoing studies to identify a panel of microsatellite loci efficient for the long-term monitoring of Apennine brown bears (Ursus arctos marsicanus), aiming at reducing genotyping uncertainty and allowing reliable individual identifications overtimes.

resultsWe examined all microsatellite markers used up to now and identified 19 candidate loci. We evaluated the efficacy of 13 of the most commonly used loci analyzing 194 DNA samples belonging to 113 distinct bears selected from the Italian national biobank. We compared data from 4 different marker subsets on the basis of genotyping errors, allelic patterns, observed and expected heterozygosity, discriminatory powers, number of mismatching pairs, and probability of identity. The optimal marker set was selected evaluating the low molecular weight, the high discriminatory power, and the low occurrence of genotyping errors of each primer. We calibrated allele calls and verified matches among genotypes obtained in previous studies using the complete set of 13 STRs (Short Tandem Repeats), analyzing six invasive DNA samples from distinct individuals. Differences in allele-sizing between labs were consistent, showing a substantial overlap of the individual genotyping.

conclusionsThe proposed marker set comprises 11 Ursus specific markers with the addition of cxx20, the canid-locus less prone to genotyping errors, in order to prevent underestimation (maximizing the discriminatory power) and overestimation (minimizing the genotyping errors) of the number of Apennine brown bears. The selected markers allow saving time and costs with the amplification in multiplex of all loci thanks to the same annealing temperature. Our work optimizes the available resources by identifying a shared panel and a uniform methodology capable of improving comparisons between past and future studies.

Indexed as

Microsatellite RepeatsUrsidaeAllelesAnimalsDNAGenotypeDNAConservation geneticsCross-species amplificationDiscriminatory powerIndividual identificationInterlaboratory comparisonItalyNon-invasive genetic profilesReproducibilitySTR calibration

Identifiers

PMID34407764
PMCPMC8371798

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.