Characterization of 12 microsatellite loci in the waterfall damselfly (Paraphlebia zoe) for use in population genetic applications
The waterfall damselfly, Paraphelbia zoe, is distributed in cloud forest areas in the Mexican states of Veracruz, Hidalgo, and San Luis Potosi. We developed twelve microsatellite loci for P. zoe from representative samples from the state of Veracruz. Microsatellites were tested for polymorphism on a panel of 24 individuals. The number of alleles ranged from 3 to 11, observed heterozygosity from 0.083 to 0.875, and the fixation index from 0.021 to 0.563. These loci are the first to be described and characterized for P. zoe and should prove useful for population genetics in support of the conservation of this vulnerable species.
KeywordsMicrosatellite Waterfall damselfly Paraphlebia zoe
John Pollinger and the UCLA Conservation Genetic Resources center provided logistical support and helpful comments on the manuscript. John McCormack also provided helpful comments on the analysis and manuscript. CNA was supported by a CONACyT postdoctoral fellowship and a UCMEXUS-CONACyT postdoctoral fellowship during this project. This project was supported by UCMEXUS-CONACyT collaborative grant CN-10-402 to GFG and ACA.
- Boutin-Ganach I, Raposo M, Raymond M, Deschepper CF (2001) M13-tailed primers improved the readability and usability of microsatellite analyses performed with two different allele-sizing methods. Biotechnic 31:24–28Google Scholar
- E González-Soriano and R Novelo-Gutiérrez (2007) Odonata of Mexico: revisited. In: Tyagi BK (ed) Proceedings of Odonata: biology of Dragonflies. Sci Publ. (India) pp 105–136Google Scholar
- Faircloth BC (2008) MSATCOMMANDER: detection of microsatellite repeat arrays and automated, locus-specific primer design. Mol Ecol Resour 8:92–94Google Scholar
- Rozen S, Skaletsky HJ (2000) PRIMER3 on the WWW for general users and for biologist programmers. In: Krawetz S, Misener S (eds) Bioinformatics methods and protocols: methods in molecular biology. Humana Press, Totowa, pp 365–386Google Scholar