Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39934178›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Validation of two swabbing methods to sample DNA for genotyping Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus).

D Righton, F Garzon, L A Hawkes, R Hicks, T Horton, M Ives, I Katsiadaki, S R McCully Phillips, S Roslyn, M Sebire and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

D RightonCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Pakefield Road, NR33 0HT, Lowestoft , Suffolk, England. david.righton@cefas.gov.uk.
F GarzonHatherly Laboratories, University of Exeter, Prince of Wales Road, Exeter, Devon, EX4 4PS, UK.
L A HawkesHatherly Laboratories, University of Exeter, Prince of Wales Road, Exeter, Devon, EX4 4PS, UK.
R HicksCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, The Nothe, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8UB, England.
T HortonHatherly Laboratories, University of Exeter, Prince of Wales Road, Exeter, Devon, EX4 4PS, UK.
M IvesCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Pakefield Road, NR33 0HT, Lowestoft , Suffolk, England.
I KatsiadakiCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, The Nothe, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8UB, England.
S R McCully PhillipsCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Pakefield Road, NR33 0HT, Lowestoft , Suffolk, England.
S RoslynCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Pakefield Road, NR33 0HT, Lowestoft , Suffolk, England.
M SebireCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, The Nothe, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8UB, England.
D StoneCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, The Nothe, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8UB, England.
M J WittHatherly Laboratories, University of Exeter, Prince of Wales Road, Exeter, Devon, EX4 4PS, UK.
S WrightCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Pakefield Road, NR33 0HT, Lowestoft , Suffolk, England.
N J McKeownDepartment of Life Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, SY23 3FL, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In fisheries, genetic based assignment of individuals to their population of origin can benefit efforts aimed at monitoring and managing stocks. Assignment combined with knowledge of the migration history of individuals can provide powerful insights into mechanisms of genetic mixing, for which refined sampling methods are required to minimise any impacts. In this study we tested two minimally invasive swabbing techniques for sampling DNA when attaching electronic satellite tags to Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) for migration studies. First, DNA was sampled by skin swabbing (hereafter skin swabs) individuals from which there were corresponding fin clip samples. Second, swabs were taken from the applicator poles used to attach electronic tags (hereafter pole swabs). Quantification of DNA from the different sources revealed decreasing yields moving from fin clips, to skin swabs, to pole swabs. The utility of the DNA obtained by both swabbing methods for individual genotyping was then assessed by sequencing of the mtDNA control region and genotyping of six microsatellite loci. In all cases successful genotyping was achieved. For mtDNA an 868 bp fragment was successfully amplified in all samples with 775 bp aligned across individuals revealing 26 haplotypes (overall haplotype diversity = 0.987). All six microsatellites were successfully amplified including a largest allele size of 291 bp. mtDNA and microsatellite genotypes for the skin swabs matched with the corresponding fin clip samples. Although no tissue replicates were available for the pole swab samples the genotypes obtained were unambiguous, consistent across repeated PCRs, and reported no evidence of PCR issues such as large allele drop out. Overall, the genetic data suggested high variability among individuals sampled, comparable to levels of genetic diversity seen within the species' Atlantic range. The study demonstrates that non-invasive sampling can be used to obtain DNA for population assignment studies and that valuable material can be sampled from tagging equipment.

Indexed as

DNAGenotyping TechniquesSpecimen HandlingTunaAnimalsDNA, MitochondrialGenotypeHaplotypesMicrosatellite RepeatsDNADNA, Mitochondrial

Identifiers

PMID39934178
PMCPMC11814236

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.