European Journal of Wildlife Research

, Volume 57, Issue 3, pp 429–435 | Cite as

Obtaining high-quality DNA from elusive small mammals using low-tech hair snares

Original Paper

Abstract

Noninvasive sampling approaches are becoming increasingly important for enabling genetic studies of wildlife populations. While a number of methods have been described to noninvasively sample hair from carnivores and medium-sized mammals, they have largely remained untested in elusive small mammals. Here we describe a novel and inexpensive noninvasive hair snare targeted at an elusive small mammal, the American pika (Ochotona princeps). We explore the quality of the sample by assessing PCR amplification success of mitochondrial and nuclear DNA fragments across four commercially available DNA isolation kits and two different quantities of hair in a factorial design. Additionally, we determined the sex of the individual samples using PCR–RFLP of ZFX/ZFY loci. We found that our snare is effective in obtaining hair that yield DNA of sufficient quality and quantity to successfully amplify a range of mitochondrial and nuclear fragment sizes. Specifically, we found the greatest success in amplifying mitochondrial DNA, nuclear microsatellites and ZFX/ZFY loci using at least 25 hairs as starting material and the DNA IQ™ system. The hair snares thus provide a cost-effective and minimally intrusive approach to sample elusive or rare small mammals. We anticipate that this approach will be useful to obtain samples for molecular studies of the ecology, evolution and conservation of small, elusive mammals.

Keywords

Microsatellites Mitochondrial DNA Noninvasive genetic sampling Molecular sexing Small mammals Ochotona princeps 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank L. Evans, B. Granger, D. Rissling, Z. Sim, A. Goodwin, K. Hayhurst, D. Kuch and S. and A. Henry for assistance in the field. K. Galbreath kindly provided pika liver samples from the Bella Coola valley. Thanks to A. Gonçalves da Silva and K. Larsen for interesting discussions that contributed to the design of this noninvasive genetic sampling method. C. Miño, A. Arnall, A. Gonçalves da Silva, C. Ray, M. Peacock and two anonymous reviewers are thanked for valuable comments on the manuscript. This work was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery and UBC Okanagan Individual Research grants to MAR. A Swiss National Science Foundation Doctoral Fellowship PBSKP3_128523 supported PH. This study was undertaken following the animal care protocol from the University of British Columbia (certificate number A07-0126).

Supplementary material

10344_2010_449_MOESM1_ESM.doc (32 kb)
Table S1Information regarding mitochondrial cytochrome b fragments amplified, including fragment names, primer names and sequences as well as overall length of fragment amplified. (DOC 32 kb)

References

  1. Banks SC, Hoyle SD, Horsup A, Sunnucks P, Taylor AC (2003) Demographic monitoring of an entire species (the northern hairy-nosed wombat, Lasiorhinus krefftii) by genetic analysis of non-invasively collected material. Anim Conserv 6:101–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beever EA, Brussard PE, Berger J (2003) Patterns of apparent extirpation among isolated populations of pikas (Ochotona princeps) in the Great Basin. J Mammal 84:37–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beja-Pereira A, Oliveira R, Alves PC, Schwartz MK, Luikart G (2009) Advancing ecological understandings through technological transformations in noninvasive genetics. Mol Ecol Resour 9:1279–1301PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bremner-Harrison S, Harrison SWR, Cypher BL, Murdoch JD, Maldonado J, Darden SK (2006) Development of a single-sampling noninvasive hair snare. Wildl Soc B 34:456–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broquet T, Petit E (2004) Quantifying genotyping errors in noninvasive population genetics. Mol Ecol 13:3601–3608PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Connior MB, Risch TS (2009) Live trap for pocket gophers. Southwest Nat 54:100–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DeSalle R, Amato G (2004) The expansion of conservation genetics. Nat Rev Genet 5:702–712PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DeYoung RW, Honeycutt RL (2005) The molecular toolbox: genetic techniques in wildlife ecology and management. J Wildl Manage 69:1362–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Excoffier L, Heckel G (2006) Computer programs for population genetics data analysis: a survival guide. Nat Rev Genet 7:745–758PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fontanesi L, Tazzoli M, Pecchioli E, Hauffe HC, Robinson TJ, Russo V (2008) Sexing European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), European brown hares (Lepus europaeus) and mountain hares (Lepus timidus) with ZFX and ZFY loci. Mol Ecol Resour 8:1294–1296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gomez A, Wright PJ, Lunt DH, Cancino JM, Carvalho GR, Hughes RN (2007) Mating trials validate the use of DNA barcoding to reveal cryptic speciation of a marine bryozoan taxon. P R Soc B 274:199–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hedmark E, Flagstad O, Segerstrom P, Persson J, Landa A, Ellegren H (2004) DNA-based individual and sex identification from wolverine (Gulo gulo) faeces and urine. Conserv Genet 5:405–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Henry P, Miquelle D, Sugimoto T, McCullough DR, Caccone A, Russello MA (2009) In situ population structure and ex situ representation of the endangered Amur tiger. Mol Ecol 18:3173–3184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kendall KC, Stetz JB, Boulanger J, Macleod AC, Paetkau D, White GC (2009) Demography and genetic structure of a recovering grizzly bear population. J Wildl Manage 73:3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Litvaitis JA, Tash JP, Litvaitis MK, Marchand MN, Kovach AI, Innes R (2006) A range-wide survey to determine the current distribution of New England cottontails. Wildl Soc B 34:1190–1197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Manchester KL (1995) Value of a(260)/a(280) ratios for measurement of purity of nucleic-acids. Biotechniques 19:208–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Mitrovski P, Heinze DA, Guthridge K, Weeks AR (2005) Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci from the Australian endemic mountain pygmy-possum, Burramys parvus Broom. Mol Ecol Notes 5:395–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Morin PA, Chambers KE, Boesch C, Vigilant L (2001) Quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis of DNA from noninvasive samples for accurate microsatellite genotyping of wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus). Mol Ecol 10:1835–1844PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mullins J, Statham MJ, Roche T, Turner PD, O’Reilly C (2010) Remotely plucked hair genotyping: a reliable and non-invasive method for censusing pine marten (Martes martes, L. 1758) populations. Eur J Wildl Res 56:443–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mullis K, Faloona F, Scharf S, Saiki R, Horn H, Erlich H (1986) Specific enzymatic amplification of DNA in vitro: the polymerase chain reaction. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 51:263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Nachman MW (2005) The genetic basis of adaptation: lessons from concealing coloration in pocket mice. Genetica 123:125–136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Paetkau D (2003) An empirical exploration of data quality in DNA-based population inventories. Mol Ecol 12:1375–1387PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pauli JN, Hamilton MB, Crain EB, Buskirk SW (2008) A single-sampling hair trap for mesocarnivores. J Wildl Manage 72:1650–1652Google Scholar
  24. Peacock MM (1997) Determining natal dispersal patterns in a population of North American pikas (Ochotona princeps) using direct mark-resight and indirect genetic methods. Behav Ecol 8:340–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peacock MM, Kirchoff VS, Merideth SJ (2002) Identification and characterization of nine polymorphic microsatellite loci in the North American pika, Ochotona princeps. Mol Ecol Notes 2:360–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Piggott MP, Taylor AC (2003) Remote collection of animal DNA and its applications in conservation management and understanding the population biology of rare and cryptic species. Wildl Res 30:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Piggott MP, Bellemain E, Taberlet P, Taylor AC (2004) A multiplex pre-amplification method that significantly improves microsatellite amplification and error rates for faecal DNA in limiting conditions. Conserv Genet 5:417–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Regnaut S, Lucas FS, Fumagalli L (2006) DNA degradation in avian faecal samples and feasibility of non-invasive genetic studies of threatened capercaillie populations. Conserv Genet 7:449–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Roon DA, Waits LP, Kendall KC (2003) A quantitative evaluation of two methods for preserving hair samples. Mol Ecol Notes 3:163–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Roon DA, Waits LP, Kendall KC (2005) A simulation test of the effectiveness of several methods for error-checking non-invasive genetic data. Anim Conserv 8:203–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rudnick JA, Katzner TE, Bragin EA, DeWoody JA (2007) Species identification of birds through genetic analysis of naturally shed feathers. Mol Ecol Notes 7:757–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Russello MA, Amato G (2001) Application of a noninvasive, PCR-Based test for sex identification in an endangered parrot, Amazona guildingii. Zoo Biol 20:41–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Russello MA, Glaberman S, Gibbs JP, Marquez C, Powell JR, Caccone A (2005) A cryptic taxon of Galapagos tortoise in conservation peril. Biol Lett-UK 1:287–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sastre N, Francino O, Lampreave G, Bologov VV, Lopez-Martin JM, Sanchez A, Ramirez O (2009) Sex identification of wolf (Canis lupus) using non-invasive samples. Conserv Genet 10:555–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith AT, Weston ML (1990) Ochotona princeps. Mamm Species 352:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sunnucks P (2000) Efficient genetic markers for population biology. Trends Ecol Evol 15:199–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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 24:3189–3194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Taberlet P, Waits LP, Luikart G (1999) Noninvasive genetic sampling: look before you leap. Trends Ecol Evol 14:323–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Toth M (2008) A new noninvasive method for detecting mammals from birds’ nests. J Wildl Manage 72:1237–1240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Waits LP, Paetkau D (2005) Noninvasive genetic sampling tools for wildlife biologists: a review of applications and recommendations for accurate data collection. J Wildl Manage 69:1419–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Willard JM, Lee DA, Holland MM (1998) Recovery of DNA for PCR amplification from blood and forensic samples using chelating resin. In: Lincoln PJ, Thomson J (eds) Forensic DNA profiling protocols. Humana, Totowa, pp 9–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Woods JG, Paetkau D, Lewis D, McLellan BN, Proctor M, Strobeck C (1999) Genetic tagging of free-ranging black and brown bears. Wildl Soc B 27:616–627Google Scholar
  43. Yu N, Zheng CL, Zhang YP, Li WH (2000) Molecular systematics of pikas (genus Ochotona) inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol 16:85–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology and Centre for Species at Risk and Habitat StudiesUniversity of British ColumbiaKelownaCanada

Personalised recommendations