Conservation Genetics Resources

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 509–511 | Cite as

Isolation and characterization of polymorphic microsatellite markers from a globally distributed marine apex predator, the tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier)

  • A. M. Bernard
  • K. A. Feldheim
  • M. S. ShivjiEmail author
Microsatellite Letters


High levels of fishing have resulted in declines among many of the oceans top predators, including the globally distributed tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier). Overexploitation of this species has led to declines in parts of its distribution, which may have important ecological consequences given the tiger shark’s trophic position as a large bodied, generalist predator. To assess the population genetics of this species, an enrichment protocol was used to isolate a suite of nine di- and tetra-nucleotide microsatellite loci within the tiger shark, which were subsequently characterized using genomic DNA derived from 40 individuals sampled from Hawaiian waters. The number of alleles per locus ranged from 3 to 23, and the average expected heterozygosities across loci ranged from 0.30 to 0.93. Analyses suggested a low frequency of null alleles across markers, and all loci conformed to both Hardy–Weinberg and linkage equilibrium at P > 0.01.


Tiger shark Galeocerdo cuvier Microsatellite Elasmobranch genetics 



Funding provided by grants from the Save Our Seas Foundation and Guy Harvey Ocean Foundation (MSS), Pritzker Foundation to the Pritzker Laboratory for Molecular Systematics and Evolution (KAF), and a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Postgraduate Scholarship (AMB). We thank T. Daly-Engel, K. Duncan, D. Grubbs, and B. Wetherbee for samples.

Supplementary material

12686_2014_408_MOESM1_ESM.doc (34 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 34 kb)


  1. Chapuis M-P, Estoup A (2007) Microsatellite null alleles and estimation of population differentiation. Mol Biol Evol 24:621–631CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Glenn TC, Schable NA (2005) Isolating microsatellite DNA loci. Methods Enzymol 395:202–222CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Rousset F (2008) Genepop ‘007: a complete reimplementation of the Genepop software for Windows and Linux. Mol Ecol Resour 8:103–106CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 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
  5. Schuelke M (2000) An economic method for the fluorescent labeling of PCR fragments. Nat Biotechnol 18:233–234Google Scholar
  6. Simpfendorfer C (2009) Galeocerdo cuvier. IUCN red list of threatened species. Accessed 9 Nov 2014

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. M. Bernard
    • 1
  • K. A. Feldheim
    • 2
  • M. S. Shivji
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Save Our Seas Shark Research Center and Guy Harvey Research InstituteNova Southeastern University, Oceanographic CenterDania BeachUSA
  2. 2.Pritzker Laboratory for Molecular Systematics and EvolutionThe Field Museum of Natural HistoryChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations