Abstract
Conservation genetic studies often employ DNA extracts from museum specimens for comparisons with extant populations to monitor temporal changes in genetic diversity. Here, we report on artifact base changes in mitochondrial DNA sequences amplified from relatively recent (≤ 35 years) museum specimens of indigobirds (Vidua spp.). Single base errors were confirmed by replicate sequencing and included both double peaks and artifact substitutions at rates of ∼3 × 10−4 and ∼1 × 10−4 per base-pair, respectively, resulting in one or more errors or ambiguities in an 1100 base pair sequence in 21% of 219 samples. Most errors involved C→T changes on the L-strand, presumably due to deamination of cytosine in the template. The error rates encountered here bias comparisons of haplotype number between historical and extant populations, such that the ‘loss’ of artifact haplotypes present in a historical sample could be incorrectly attributed to a population decline or bottleneck. Sequencing errors due to miscoding lesions in template DNA have so far been reported only from ancient and formalin-fixed tissue, but they may also affect relatively recent museum samples, as shown here, and perhaps also non-invasive samples that typically yield low-quality DNA.
References
Akbari M, Hansen MD, Halgunset J, Skorpen F, Krokan HE (2005) Low copy number DNA template can render polymerase chain reaction error prone in a sequence-dependent manner. J Mol Diagn 7:36–39
Beaumont MA (2003) Estimation of population growth or decline in genetically monitored populations. Genetics 164:1139–1160
Bonin A, Bellemain E, Bronken Eidesen P, Pompanon F, Brochmann C, Taberlet P (2004) How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetics studies. Mol Ecol 13:3261–3273
Buchan JC, Archie EA, van Horn RC, Moss CJ, Alberts SC (2005) Locus effects and sources of error in noninvasive genotyping. Mol Ecol Notes 5:680–683
Clark AG, Whittam TS (1992) Sequencing errors and molecular evolutionary analysis. Mol Biol Evol 9:744–752
Cooper A (1994) DNA from museum specimens. In: Herrmann B, Herrmann S (eds) Ancient DNA: recovery and analysis of genetic material from paleontological, archeological, museum, medical and forensic specimens. Springer, New York
Cooper A, Poinar HN (2000) Ancient DNA: do it right or not at all. Science 289:1139
Culver M, Johnson WE, Pecon-Slattery J, O’Brien SJ (2000) Genomic ancestry of the American puma (Puma concolor). J Hered 91:186–197
Gagneux P, Boesch C, Woodruff DS (1997) Microsatellite scoring errors associated with noninvasive genotyping based on nuclear DNA amplified from shed hair. Mol Ecol 6:861–868
Gilbert MTP, Hansen AJ, Willerslev E, Rudbeck L, Barnes I, Lynnerup N, Cooper A (2003). Characterization of genetic miscoding lesions caused by postmortem damage. Am J Hum Genet 72:48–61
Glenn TC, Stephan W, Braun MJ (1999) Effects of a population bottleneck on Whooping Crane mitochondrial DNA variation. Conserv Biol 13:1097–1107
Godoy JA, Negro JJ, Hiraldo F, Donázar JA (2004) Phylogeography, genetic structure and diversity in the endangered bearded vulture (Gypaetus barbatus, L.) as revealed by mitochondrial DNA. Mol Ecol 13:371–390
Hansen AJ, Willerslev E, Wiuf C, Mourier T, Arctander P (2001) Statistical evidence for miscoding lesions in ancient DNA templates. Mol Biol Evol 18:262–265
Hofreiter M, Jaenicke V, Serre D, von Haeseler A, Pääbo S (2001). DNA sequences from multiple amplifications reveal artifacts induced by cytosine deamination in ancient DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 29:4793–4799
Johnson JA, Dunn PO (2006) Low genetic variation in the Heath Hen prior to extinction and implications for the conservation of prairie-chicken populations. Conserv Genet 7:37–48
Johnson JA, Bellinger MR, Toepfer JE, Dunn P (2004) Temporal changes in allele frequencies and low effective population size in greater prairie-chickens. Mol Ecol 13:2617–2630
Kalinowski ST, Taper ML, Creel S (2006) Using DNA from non-invasive samples to identify individuals and census populations: an evidential approach tolerant of genotyping errors. Conserv Genet 7:319–329
Lage C, Kornfield I (2006) Reduced genetic diversity and effective population size in an endangered Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) population from Maine, USA. Conserv Genet 7:91–104
Lindahl T (1993) Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA. Nature 362:709–715
Luikart G, Sherwin WB, Steele BM, Allendorf FW (1998) Usefulness of molecular markers for detecting population bottlenecks via monitoring genetic change. Mol Ecol 7:963–974
MacHugh DE, Troy CS, McCormick F, Olsaker I, Eythórsdóttir E, Bradley DG (1999) Early medieval cattle remains from a Scandinavian settlement in Dublin: genetic analysis and comparison with extant breeds. Proc R Soc Lond B 354:99–109
Miller CR, Joyce P, Waits LP (2002) Assessing allelic dropout and genotype reliability using maximum likelihood. Genetics 160:357–366
Mills LS, Citta JJ, Lair KP, Schwartz MK, Tallmon DA (2000) Estimating animal abundance using noninvasive DNA sampling: promise and pitfalls. Ecol Appl 10:283–294
Muñoz-Fuentes V, Green AJ, Negro JJ, Sorenson MD (2005) Population structure and loss of genetic diversity in the endangered white-headed duck, Oxyura leucocephala. Conserv Genet 6:999–1015
Pääbo S, Poinar H, Serre D, Jaenicke-Després V, Hebler J, Rohland N, Kuch M, Krause J, Vigilant L, Hofreiter M (2004) Genetic analyses from ancient DNA. Annu Rev Genet 38:645–679
Payne RB, Sorenson MD (2002). Museum collections as sources of genetic data. In: R. van den Elzen (ed) Bird Collections in Europe: promotion of science in ornithology. Alexander Koenig Research Institute and Museum of Zoology Proceedings, Vol. 2, Bonn, Germany
Paxinos EE, James HF, Olson SL, Ballou JD, Leonard JA, Fleischer RC (2002) Prehistoric decline of genetic diversity in the nene. Science 296:1827–1827
Quach N, Goodman MF, Shibata D (2004) In vitro mutation artifacts after formalin fixation and error prone translesion synthesis during PCR. BMC Clin Pathol 4:1–5
Rozas J, Sánchez-Delbarrio JC, Messeguer X, Rozas R (2003) DnaSP, DNA polymorphism analyses by the coalescent and other methods. Bioinformatics 19:2496–2497
Sefc KM, Payne RB, Sorenson MD (2003) Microsatellite amplification from museum feather samples: the effects of fragment size and template concentration on genotyping errors. Auk 120:982–989
Sefc KM, Payne RB, Sorenson MD (2005). Genetic continuity of brood-parasitic indigobird species. Mol Ecol 14:1407–1419
Sorenson MD, Payne RB (2001) A single, ancient origin of obligate brood parasitism in African finches: implications for host-parasite coevolution. Evolution 55:2550–2567
Sorenson MD, Sefc KM, Payne RB (2003) Speciation by host switch in brood parasitic indigobirds. Nature 424:928–931
Swofford DL (2002) PAUP* 4.0b10: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony. Sinauer, Sunderland Massachusetts
Taberlet P, Griffin S, Goossens B, Questiau S, Manceau V, Escaravage N, Waits LP, Bouvet J (1996) Reliable genotyping of samples with very low DNA quantities using PCR. Nucleic Acids Res 24:3189–3194
Vallianatos M, Lougheed SC, Boag PT (2002) Conservation genetics of the loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) in central and eastern North America. Conserv Genet 3:1–13
Williams C, Pontén F, Moberg C, Söderkvist P, Uhlén M, Pontén J, Sitbon G, Lundeberg J (1999) A high frequency of sequence alterations is due to formalin fixation of archival specimens. Am J Pathol 155:1467–1471
Acknowledgements
Field work from 1966 to the present has been supported and facilitated by numerous agencies and individuals. Jeff Tetrault assisted with the replicate sequencing. The work was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (P17380-B06; J-2044), the National Science Foundation (IOB 9412399; DEB 0089757), and the Dr. Heinrich-Jörg-Stiftung (Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, Austria).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sefc, K.M., Payne, R.B. & Sorenson, M.D. Single base errors in PCR products from avian museum specimens and their effect on estimates of historical genetic diversity. Conserv Genet 8, 879–884 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-006-9240-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-006-9240-8