Literature DB >> 22040612

Suction sampling as a significant source of error in molecular analysis of predator diets.

R A King1, J S Davey, J R Bell, D S Read, D A Bohan, W O C Symondson.   

Abstract

The molecular detection of predation is a fast growing field, allowing highly specific and sensitive detection of prey DNA within the gut contents or faeces of a predator. Like all molecular methods, this technique is prone to potential sources of error that can result in both false positive and false negative results. Here, we test the hypothesis that the use of suction samplers to collect predators from the field for later molecular analysis of predation will lead to high numbers of false positive results. We show that, contrary to previous published work, the use of suction samplers resulted in previously starved predators testing positive for aphid and collembolan DNA, either as a results of ectopic contamination or active predation in the collecting cup/bag. The contradictory evidence for false positive results, across different sampling protocols, sampling devices and different predator-prey systems, highlights the need for experimentation prior to mass field collections of predators to find techniques that minimise the risk of false positives.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22040612     DOI: 10.1017/S0007485311000575

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bull Entomol Res        ISSN: 0007-4853            Impact factor:   1.750


  2 in total

1.  Insights into aphid prey consumption by ladybirds: Optimising field sampling methods and primer design for high throughput sequencing.

Authors:  Lolita Ammann; Rosemary Moorhouse-Gann; Jordan Cuff; Colette Bertrand; Laia Mestre; Nicolás Pérez Hidalgo; Amy Ellison; Felix Herzog; Martin H Entling; Matthias Albrecht; William O C Symondson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Consuming alternative prey does not influence the DNA detectability half-life of pest prey in spider gut contents.

Authors:  Dávid Fülöp; Éva Szita; Regina Gerstenbrand; Gergely Tholt; Ferenc Samu
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 2.984

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.