A multi-samples, multi-extracts approach for microsatellite analysis of faecal samples in an arboreal ape

By Benoit Goossens, L. Chikhi, S. Utami, J. D. de Ruiter, M. W. Bruford. Conservation Genetics, 2000

154 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Molecular Biology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1cca249bb0542df9d1ba0677a3ff9dfa854ac62a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. L. Waits
2. M. Piggott
3. K. Kendall
4. M. Murphy
5. Andrew Robinson
6. A. Taylor
7. S. Banks
8. S. Breck

In Molecular Biology

1. M. Piggott
2. David B. Wester
3. A. Taylor
4. R. Baker
5. P. Sunnucks
6. L. Waits

Citations in the corpus

• Demographic monitoring of an entire species (the northern hairy‐nosed wombat, Lasiorhinus krefftii) by genetic analysis of non‐invasively collected material (2003, background): “It is also possible that some individuals consistently leave poorer-quality hair samples that do not yield genotypes (see Goossens et al. (2000) for this effect in genotyping DNA from faeces).”
• Remote collection of animal DNA and its applications in conservation management and understanding the population biology of rare and cryptic species (2003, background): “Their removal requires repeated purification steps, usually involving centrifugation, typically performed using filter columns or silica binding beads (Hoss et al. 1992; Taberlet et al. 1997; Kohn et al. 1999; Bayes et al. 2000; Bradley et al. 2000; Goossens et al. 2000; Constable et al. 2001; Banks”
• Importance of a pilot study for non-invasive genetic sampling: genotyping errors and population size estimation in red deer (2006, unknown): “Bayes et al. (2000) Papio sp. Faeces 8 8% (P) 1.2% (P) Constable et al. (2001) Pan troglodytes Faeces 16 30% (S) Morin et al. (2001) Pan troglodytes Faeces 9 24% (P) Launhardt et al. (1998) Presbytis entellus Faeces 5 5% (S) 0% (S) Lathuillie `re et al. (2001) Macaca sylvanus Faeces 3 0‐6% (P) 13‐20”
• Noninvasive population genetics: a review of sample source, diet, fragment length and microsatellite motif effects on amplification success and genotyping error rates (2006, unknown): “…et al. (1997) Pan troglodytes H 220 Tri 32.1 Tri 22.6 Di 43.5 204 Di 25.3 178 Di 27.5 143 Di 26.8 Tetra 34.6 Tetra 31.4 Tetra 36 Tetra 29.2 Di 42.6 Goossens et al. (2000) Pongo pygmaeus abelii F 65 Tetra 4.2 Huber et al. (2003)d Lepus europaeus F 97.2 117 96.6 182 96.4 263 95.2 172 Huber et al.…”
• The impact of time and field conditions on brown bear (Ursus arctos) faecal DNA amplification (2007, methodology): “Therefore, the genotype at G1A could be established by amplification of DNA template from blood or tissue, or by establishing a correct consensus genotype from faecal samples typed multiple times with a multiple tubes approach (Tablerlet et al 1996; Goossens et al. 2000).”
• Evaluation of Fecal DNA Preservation Techniques and Effects of Sample Age and Diet on Genotyping Success (2011, methodology): “…extraction and amplification success are influenced by both environmental factors (e.g., temperature, humidity, sun exposure; Farrell et al. 2000, Goossens et al. 2000, Lucchini et al. 2002, Nsubuga et al. 2004), of which scats are exposed to prior to collection, and by more controllable…”