Risks involved in fecal DNA-based genotyping of microsatellite loci in the Amur tiger Panthera tigris altaica: a pilot study

Abstract

In modern wildlife ecological research, feces is the most common non-invasive source of DNA obtained in the field and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology based on microsatellite markers is used to mine genetic information contained within. This is especially the case for endangered species. However, there are risks associated with this genotyping method because of the poor quality of fecal DNA. In this study, we assessed genotyping risk across 12 microsatellite loci commonly used in previous tiger studies using blood and fecal DNA from captive Amur tigers (Panthera tigris altaica). To begin, we developed an index termed the accumulated matching rate of genotypes (R _m) between positive DNA (blood samples) and fecal DNA to explore the correct genotyping probability of a certain microsatellite locus. We found that different microsatellite loci had different genotyping risks and required different PCR amplification protocols. The genotyping errors we detected altered population genetic parameters and potentially impact subsequent analyses. Based on these findings, we recommend that: (1) four loci (E7, Fca094, Pti007 and Pti010) of 12 loci are not suitable for Amur tiger genetic research because of a low R _m and difficulty reaching a stable status; (2) the R _m of the 12 microsatellite loci plateaued differently, and considering limited budgets, amplification times of some loci could be increased when using fecal samples; and (3) future genetic analysis of wild Amur tigers should be corrected by genotyping error rates (1 − R _m).

Keywords

Amur tiger / Genotyping risk / Microsatellite / Non-invasive sample

References

[1] Arandjelovic M, Guschanski K, Schubert G, Harris TR, Thalmann O, Siedel H, Vigilant L. Two-step multiplex polymerase chain reaction improves the speed and accuracy of genotyping using DNA from noninvasive and museum samples. Mol Ecol Resour, 2009, 9(1): 28-36.

[2] Bhagavatula J, Singh L. Genotyping faecal samples of Bengal tiger Panthera tigris tigris for population estimation: a pilot study. BMC Genet, 2006 7 1 48

[3] Bradley BJ, Boesch C, Vigilant L. Identification and redesign of human microsatellite markers for genotyping wild chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes verus) and gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) DNA from faeces. Conserv Genet, 2000, 1(3): 289-292.

[4] Brinkman TJ, Schwartz MK, Person DK, Pilgrim KL, Hundertmark KJ. Effects of time and rainfall on PCR success using DNA extracted from deer fecal pellets. Conserv Genet, 2010, 11(4): 1547-1552.

[5] Deagle BE, Eveson JP, Jarman SN. Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples–a case study on DNA in faeces. Front Zool, 2006 3 1 11

[6] Garshelis DL, Wang H, Wang DJ, Zhu XJ, Li S, Mchea WJ. Do revised giant panda population estimates aid in their conservation. Ursus, 2008, 19(2): 168-176.

[7] Hájková P, Zemanová B, Bryja J, Hajek B, Roche K, Tkadlec E, Zima J. Factors affecting success of PCR amplification of microsatellite loci from otter faeces. Mo Ecol Notes, 2006, 6(2): 559-562.

[8] He G, Huang K, Guo ST, Ji WH, Qi XG, Ren Y, Jin XL, Li BG. Evaluating the reliability of microsatellite genotyping from low-quality DNA templates with a polynomial distribution model. Chin Sci Bull, 2011, 56(24): 2523-2530.

[9] Huber S, Bruns U, Arnold W. Genotyping herbivore feces facilitating their further analyses. Wildl Soc B, 2003, 31(1): 692-697.

[10] Liu D, Ma Y, Li HY, Xu YC, Zhang Y, Dahmer T, Bai SY, Wang J. Simultaneous polyandry and heteropaternity in tiger (Panthera tigris altaica): implications for conservation of genetic diversity in captive populations of felids. Chin Sci Bull, 2013, 58(18): 2230-2236.

[11] Marshall TC, Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Pemberton JM. Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol Ecol, 1998, 7(5): 639-655.

[12] Menotti-Raymond M, David VA, Lyons LA, Schäffer AA, Tomlin JF, Hutton MK, O’Brien SJ. A genetic linkage map of microsatellites in the domestic cat (Felis catus). Genomics, 1999, 57: 9-23.

[13] Murphy MA, Kendall A, Robinson A, Perugini C, Waits LP. The impact of time and field conditions on brown bear fecal DNA amplification. Conserv Genet, 2007, 8: 1219-1224.

[14] Nazarenko I, Pires R, Lowe B, Obaidy M, Rashtchian A. Effect of primary and secondary structure of oligodeoxyribonucleotides on the fluorescent properties of conjugated dyes. Nucleic Acids Res, 2002, 30(9): 2089-2195.

[15] Nsubuga AM, Robbins MM, Roeder AD, Morin PA, Boesch C, Vigilant L. Factors affecting the amount of genomic DNA extracted from ape faeces and the identification of an improved sample storage method. Mol Ecol, 2004, 13(7): 2089-2094.

[16] Panasci M, Ballard WB, Breck S, Rodriguez D, Densmore LD, Wester DB, Baker J. Evaluation of fecal DNA preservation techniques and effects of sample age and diet on genotyping success. J Wildl Manag, 2011, 75(7): 1616-1624.

[17] Regnaut S, Lucas FS, Fumagalli L. DNA degradation in avian faecal samples and feasibility of non-invasive genetic studies of threatened capercaillie populations. Conserv Genet, 2006, 7: 449-453.

[18] Roon DA, Waits LP, Kendall KC. A quantitative evaluation of two methods for preserving hair samples. Mol Ecol Notes, 2003, 3: 163-166.

[19] Rozhnov VV, Sorokin PA, Naidenko SV, Lukarevskiy VS, Hernandez-Blanco HA, Litvinov MN, Kotlyar AK, Yudin VG. Noninvasive individual identification of the Amur tiger (Panthera tigris altaica) by molecular-genetic methods. Dokl Biol Sci, 2009, 429(1): 518-522.

[20] Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 1989 2 New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press 1626

[21] Sambrook J, Russell DW, Russell DW. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual (3-volume set), 2001, New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press 2100

[22] Santini A, Lucchini V, Fabbri E, Randi E. Ageing and environmental factors affect PCR success in wolf (Canis lupus) excremental DNA samples. Mo Ecol Notes, 2007, 7: 955-961.

[23] Stenglein JL, Barba MD, Ausband DE, Waits LP. Impacts of sampling location within a faeces on DNA quality in two carnivore species. Mol Ecol Resour, 2010, 10(1): 109-114.

[24] Taberlet P, Luikart G. Noninvasive genetic sampling and individual identification. Biol J Linn Soc, 1999, 68: 41-55.

[25] Taberlet P, Griffin S, Goossens B, Questiau S, Manceau V, Escaravage N, Waits LP, Bouvet J. Reliable genotyping of samples with very low DNA quantities using PCR. Nucleic Acids Res, 1996, 24: 3189-3194.

[26] Woodruff DS. Non-invasive genotyping of primates. Primates, 1993, 34: 333-346.

[27] Xu YC, Li B, Li WS, Bai SY, Jin Y, Li XP, Gu MB, Jing SY. Individualization of tiger by using microsatellites. Forensic Sci Int, 2005, 151(1): 45-51.

[28] SPSS 13.0 for Windows and SmartViewer version 13.0. SPSS, Inc, Chicago

[29] Yeh FC, Yang RC, Timothy BJ, Boyle ZH. POPGENE, the user-friendly shareware for population genetic analysis, 2001, Edmonton: Molecular Biology and Biotechnology Centre, University of Alberta 10

[30] Zhang YG, Li DQ, Rao LQ, Xiao QM, Liu D. Identification of polymorphic microsatellite DNA loci and paternity testing of Amur tigers. Acta Zool Sin, 2003, 49(1): 118-123.

[31] Zhang WP, Zhang ZH, Xu X, Wei K, Wang XF, Liang X, Zhang L, Shen FJ, Hou R, Yue BS. A new method for DNA extraction from feces and hair shafts of the South China tiger (Panthera tigris amoyensis). Zoo Biol, 2009, 28(1): 49-58.