Efficient genetic markers for population biology.

By P. Sunnucks. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2000

1,069 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a81adbb93c80bf300f5391b69f55c0e4f42b9700

How researchers see this paper

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

In Genetics

Citations in the corpus

Molecular markers for biodiversity analysis of wildlife animals: a brief review (2009, background): “Several types of molecular markers, including mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and nuclear DNA markers, are available but none of them can be regarded as optimal for all applications (Sunnucks, 2000).”
Molecular techniques, wildlife management and the importance of genetic population structure and dispersal: a case study with feral pigs (2004, background): “This approach has a number of advantages over the use of traditional single divergence measures that compare allele frequencies ( Sunnucks 2000; Manel, Berthier & Luikart 2002).”
Differentiation at a microgeographical scale within two species of ground beetle, Carabus auronitens and C. nemoralis (Coleoptera, Carabidae): a geometrical morphometric approach (2001, background): “This has been related to the concomitant development of efficient genetic markers as well as powerful statistical analyses of data obtained with these markers (Sunnucks 2000).”
Genetic characterization of livestock populations and its use in conservation decision-making. (2005, background): “133 A diversity of genetic characterization information Genetic markers will provide different types of information relevant for conservation-making decisions for livestock [11].”
Beyond FST: Analysis of population genetic data for conservation (2004, background): “Our goal here is therefore to describe the types of information that can be gained through new analytical approaches to population genetic data (both allele-frequency or sequence based; see Sunnucks 2000 for an overview of DNA marker choice), provide an overview of their use, and direct readers to”
Insect-Fungal Associations: Ecology and Evolution (2005, background): “Mutation rates estimated for microsatellites and SNPs differ by several orders of magnitude (e.g., ≈10–4 versus 10–8– 10–9, respectively; Brumfield et al. 2003).”
Mitochondrial markers for identification and phylogenetic studies in insects - A Review (2014, background): “However, the choice of a molecular marker in a particular analysis is crucial since sequence fragment, whose rate of substitution is inappropriate for the level of divergence under study, can be a source of misleading data [29].”
Incorporating molecular evolution into phylogenetic analysis, and a new compilation of conserved polymerase chain reaction primers for animal mitochondrial DNA (2006, background): “Thus, through genetic drift, their gene trees achieve species-level reciprocal monophyly sooner after speciation than do gene trees generated from nuclear substitutions (Sunnucks 2000).”
Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers and its applications (2011, background): “Several types of molecular markers are available but none of them can be regarded as optimal for all applications.(10) The characteristic features of RAPD nuclear DNA marker(11) is summarized in Table 1.”
Estimating effective population size from linkage disequilibrium: severe bias in small samples (2006, positive): “The ease of development of hypervariable, codominant, population genetic markers is improving rapidly (Sunnucks 2000; Schlotterer 2004) to the point where highly precise and accurate estimates from the linkage disequilibrium method may soon be possible in many species.”
The gap between the concept and definitions in the Evolutionarily Significant Unit: the need to integrate neutral genetic variation and adaptive variation (2007, background): “Moreover, the use of molecular technology is gaining more popularity with the advent of efficient genetic markers (Jarne and Lagoda 1996; Sunnucks 2000) and statistical analysis (Luikart and England 1999).”
Individual dispersal, landscape connectivity and ecological networks (2013, background): “One of the major advantages of using genetic tools to assess gene flow and infer the role of landscape features in the observed gene flow is the possibility to work at several spatial and temporal scales when required, provided that the right panel of genetic markers is used (Sunnucks, 2000; Zhang &”