Advertisement

Conservation Genetics

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 445–449 | Cite as

A low rate of cross-species microsatellite amplification success in Ranid frogs

  • Craig R. PrimmerEmail author
  • Juha Merilä
Note
amphibian heterologous amplification microsatellite Rana 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Avise JC, Johns GC (1999) Proposal for a standardised temporal scheme of biological classification for extant species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 96, 7358–7363.Google Scholar
  2. Berlin S, Merilä J, Ellegren H (2000) Isolation and characterisation of polymorphic microsatellite loci in the common frog, Rana temporaria. Mol. Ecol., 9, 1938–1939.Google Scholar
  3. Call DR, Hallett JG (1998) PCR primers for microsatellite loci in the anurans Rana luteiventris and Hyla regilla. Mol. Ecol., 7, 1085–1087.Google Scholar
  4. Garner TW, Gautschi B, Rothlisberger S, Reyer HU (2000) A set of CA repeat microsatellite markers derived from the pool frog, Rana lessonae. Mol. Ecol., 9, 2173–2175.Google Scholar
  5. Garner TWJ, Tomio G (2001) Microsatellites for use in studies of the Italian Agile Frog, Rana latastei (Boulenger). Cons. Genet., 2, 77–80.Google Scholar
  6. Garner TWJ (2002) Genome size and microsatellites: The effect of nuclear size on amplification potential. Genome (in press).Google Scholar
  7. Gasc JP, Cabela A, Crnobrnja-Isailovic J, Dolmen D, Grossenbacher K, Haffner P, Lescure J, Martens H, Martinéz Rica JP, Oliveira ME, Sofianidou TS, Veith M, Zuiderwijk A (1997) Atlas of Amphibians and Reptiles in Europe, p. 496. Societas Europaea Herpetologica and Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle (IEGB/SPN), Paris.Google Scholar
  8. Graf J-D, Polls-Pelaz M (1989) Evolutionary genetics of the Rana esculenta complex. In: Evolution and ecology of unisexual vertebrates (eds. Dawlet RM, Bogart JP), pp. 289–302. NY State Mus. Bull. 466, Albany, USA.Google Scholar
  9. Gregory TR (2001) The animal genome size database (Available from http://www.genomesize.com).Google Scholar
  10. Houlahan JE, Findlay CS, Schmidt BR, Meyer AH, Kuzmin SL (2000) Quantitative evidence for global amphibian population declines. Nature, 404, 752–755.Google Scholar
  11. Liu Z, Crooijmans RPMA, van der Poel JJ, Groenen MAM (1996) Use of chicken microsatellite markers in turkey: A pessimistic view. Anim. Genet., 27, 191–193.Google Scholar
  12. Moore SS, Sargeant LL, King TJ, Mattick JS, Georges M, Hetzel DJS (1991) The conservation of dinucleotide microsatellites among mammalian genomes allows the use of heterologous PCR primer pairs in closely related species. Genomics, 10, 654–660.Google Scholar
  13. Morin PA, Mahboubi P, Wedel S, Rogers J (1998) Rapid screening and comparison of human microsatellite markers in baboons: Allele size is conserved, but allele number is not. Genomics, 53, 12–20.Google Scholar
  14. Newman RA, Squire T (2001) Microsatellite variation and fine-scale population structure in the wood frog (Rana sylvatica). Mol. Ecol., 10, 1087–1100.Google Scholar
  15. Primmer CR, Møller AP, Ellegren H (1996) A wide-range survey of cross-species microsatellite amplification in birds. Mol. Ecol., 5, 365–378.Google Scholar
  16. Rowe G, Beebee T, Burke T (2000) A further four polymorphic microsatellite loci in the natterjack toad Bufo calamita. Cons. Genet., 1, 371–372.Google Scholar
  17. Rowe G, Beebee T (2001) Polymerase chain reaction primers for microsatellite loci in the common frog Rana temporaria. Mol. Ecol. Notes, 1, 6–7.Google Scholar
  18. Vos CC, Antonisse-De Jong AG, Goedhart PW, Smulders MJM (2001) Genetic similarity as a measure for connectivity between fragmented populations of the moor frog (Rana arvalis). Heredity, 86, 598–608.Google Scholar
  19. Zeisset I, Rowe G, Beebee TJ (2000) Polymerase chain reaction primers for microsatellite loci in the north European water frogs Rana ridibunda and R. lessonae. Mol. Ecol., 9, 1173–1174.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Population Biology, Department of Ecology and SystematicsUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland (Author for correspondence: E-mail

Personalised recommendations