An evaluation of long-term preservation methods for brown bear (Ursus arctos) faecal DNA samples

By M. Murphy, L. Waits, K. Kendall, S. Wasser, Jerry A. Higbee, R. Bogden. Conservation Genetics, 2002

150 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Microbiology, Molecular Biology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ec97e4cf20095d9cae64317b37d551d86f2ff8bd

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. E. Randi
2. L. Waits
3. Andrew Robinson
4. Gordon B. Stenhouse
5. E. Fabbri
6. A. Santini
7. M. Murphy
8. K. Kendall

In Molecular Biology

1. E. Randi
2. David B. Wester
3. Z. Nagy
4. R. Baker
5. A. Santini
6. L. Waits

Citations in the corpus

• The impact of time and field conditions on brown bear (Ursus arctos) faecal DNA amplification (2007, methodology): “Researchers have demonstrated the importance of laboratory factors including faecal preservation method (Wasser et al. 1997; Murphy et al. 2000; Murphy et al. 2002; Piggott and Taylor 2003), faecal DNA extraction method (Flagstad et al.”
• Evaluation of Fecal DNA Preservation Techniques and Effects of Sample Age and Diet on Genotyping Success (2011, background): “Many studies have attempted to improve fecal DNA genotyping techniques (e.g., Wasser et al. 1997, Frantzen et al. 1998, Morin et al. 2001, Murphy et al. 2002), but with so many variables influencing success, previous techniques developed with other species, or with similar species elsewhere, may be…”
• Noninvasive population genetics: a review of sample source, diet, fragment length and microsatellite motif effects on amplification success and genotyping error rates (2006, background): “Lathuillie `re et al. (2001) Macaca sylvanus H F 70.0 3.0 Launhardt et al. (1998) Presbytis entellus O F 70.0 ~6.8 Lucchini et al. (2002) Canis lupus C F 84.0 53.0 18.0 Morin et al. (2001) Pan troglodytes verus O F 79.0 24.0 Murphy et al. (2000) Ursus arctos O F 98.0 89.0 Murphy et al. (2002) Ursu”
• Scat detection dogs in wildlife research and management: application to grizzly and black bears in the Yellowhead ecosystem, Alberta, Canada (2004, methodology): “The preservation method was changed in 2001 to improve DNA amplification success as well as hormone preservation (Wasser et al. 1997a; Murphy et al. 2002; Hunt and Wasser 2003).”
• A hands-on overview of tissue preservation methods for molecular genetic analyses (2010, background): “, 90% ethanol was favoured for brown bear faeces (Murphy et al. 2002).”
• Ageing and environmental factors affect PCR success in wolf (Canis lupus) excremental DNA samples (2007, background): “gel drying worked safely in some cases, but not for storage of very wet samples, which may not desiccate and get mouldy (Murphy et al. 2002).”