Literature DB >> 21585832

Extracting DNA from museum bird eggs, and whole genome amplification of archive DNA.

Patricia L M Lee1, Robert P Prys-Jones.   

Abstract

We present a comprehensive protocol for extracting DNA from egg membranes and other internal debris recovered from the interior of blown museum bird eggs. A variety of commercially available DNA extraction methods were found to be applicable. DNA sequencing of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products for a 176-bp fragment of mitochondrial DNA was successful for most egg samples (> 78%) even though the amount of DNA extracted (mean = 14.71 ± 4.55 ng/µL) was significantly less than that obtained for bird skin samples (mean = 67.88 ± 4.77 ng/µL). For PCR and sequencing of snipe (Gallinago) DNA, we provide eight new primers for the 'DNA barcode' region of COI mtDNA. In various combinations, the primers target a range of PCR products sized from 72 bp to the full 'barcode' of 751 bp. Not all possible combinations were tested with archive snipe DNA, but we found a significantly better success rate of PCR amplification for a shorter 176-bp target compared with a larger 288-bp fragment (67% vs. 39%). Finally, we explored the feasibility of whole genome amplification (WGA) for extending the use of archive DNA in PCR and sequencing applications. Of two WGA approaches, a PCR-based method was found to be able to amplify whole genomic DNA from archive skins and eggs from museum bird collections. After WGA, significantly more archive egg samples produced visible PCR products on agarose (56.9% before WGA vs. 79.0% after WGA). However, overall sequencing success did not improve significantly (78.8% compared with 83.0%).
© 2007 The Authors.

Entities:  

Year:  2008        PMID: 21585832     DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.02042.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour        ISSN: 1755-098X            Impact factor:   7.090


  10 in total

1.  Fossil avian eggshell preserves ancient DNA.

Authors:  Charlotte L Oskam; James Haile; Emma McLay; Paul Rigby; Morten E Allentoft; Maia E Olsen; Camilla Bengtsson; Gifford H Miller; Jean-Luc Schwenninger; Chris Jacomb; Richard Walter; Alexander Baynes; Joe Dortch; Michael Parker-Pearson; M Thomas P Gilbert; Richard N Holdaway; Eske Willerslev; Michael Bunce
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-03-10       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Are mini DNA-barcodes sufficiently informative to resolve species identities? An in silico analysis using Phyllanthus.

Authors:  R Srirama; B R Gurumurthy; U Senthilkumar; G Ravikanth; R Uma Shaanker; M B Shivanna
Journal:  J Genet       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.166

3.  Climatic niche evolution is faster in sympatric than allopatric lineages of the butterfly genus Pyrgus.

Authors:  Camille Pitteloud; Nils Arrigo; Tomasz Suchan; Alicia Mastretta-Yanes; Roger Vila; Vlad Dincă; Juan Hernández-Roldán; Ernst Brockmann; Yannick Chittaro; Irena Kleckova; Luca Fumagalli; Sven Buerki; Loïc Pellissier; Nadir Alvarez
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Lost in translation or deliberate falsification? Genetic analyses reveal erroneous museum data for historic penguin specimens.

Authors:  Sanne Boessenkool; Bastiaan Star; R Paul Scofield; Philip J Seddon; Jonathan M Waters
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-12-09       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Utility of arsenic-treated bird skins for DNA extraction.

Authors:  Till Töpfer; Anita Gamauf; Elisabeth Haring
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2011-06-15

6.  Conflict between genetic and phenotypic differentiation: the evolutionary history of a 'lost and rediscovered' shorebird.

Authors:  Frank E Rheindt; Tamás Székely; Scott V Edwards; Patricia L M Lee; Terry Burke; Peter R Kennerley; David N Bakewell; Monif Alrashidi; András Kosztolányi; Michael A Weston; Wei-Ting Liu; Wei-Pan Lei; Yoshimitsu Shigeta; Sálim Javed; Sama Zefania; Clemens Küpper
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Novel Substrates as Sources of Ancient DNA: Prospects and Hurdles.

Authors:  Eleanor Joan Green; Camilla F Speller
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2017-07-13       Impact factor: 4.096

Review 8.  Cracking the egg: the use of modern and fossil eggs for ecological, environmental and biological interpretation.

Authors:  Shaena Montanari
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 2.963

Review 9.  Modernizing the Toolkit for Arthropod Bloodmeal Identification.

Authors:  Erin M Borland; Rebekah C Kading
Journal:  Insects       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 2.769

10.  Genetic barcoding of museum eggshell improves data integrity of avian biological collections.

Authors:  Alicia Grealy; Naomi E Langmore; Leo Joseph; Clare E Holleley
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-15       Impact factor: 4.379

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.