Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-24T16:20:39.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

20 - Collection, storage and analysis of non-invasive genetic material in primate biology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Benoît Goossens
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
Nicola Anthony
Affiliation:
University of New Orleans
Kathryn Jeffery
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
Mireille Johnson-Bawe
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
Michael W. Bruford
Affiliation:
Cardiff University
Joanna M. Setchell
Affiliation:
University of Surrey, Roehampton
Deborah J. Curtis
Affiliation:
University of Surrey, Roehampton
Get access

Summary

WHY NON-INVASIVE?

Until recently, genetic studies of wild non-human primate populations (henceforth called primates in this chapter) have lagged behind those of other groups of animals studied by ecologists and evolutionary biologists. During the 1980s when, for example, avian, carnivore and hymenopteran molecular studies dominated the pages of high profile journals, primate studies were notable by their absence, and, to date, with a few exceptions, this remains the case. Two reasons underlie this imbalance.

First, primate populations do not provide the necessary replicates, sample sizes and relatively simple structures of many other groups. Social systems are often complex, generation times are long and habituated groups are extremely precious commodities. Molecular ecological methods were not always able to answer the questions that primatologists wanted to ask.

Secondly, obtaining genetic material before the advent of faecal and hair genotyping was logistically and ethically almost impossible for many populations, especially in groups where habituation over many years might have been severely affected by a large-scale, invasive sampling programme. Such problems particularly prevented many of the long-term studies that characterise primatology from taking up the challenge of adding a genetic dimension, even though there was potentially a great deal of new information to be gained. Non-invasive genetic analysis using new, high precision, molecular tools is therefore an extremely important development in primatology. However, it remains extremely difficult, time-consuming, expensive and prone to error.

Type
Chapter
Information
Field and Laboratory Methods in Primatology
A Practical Guide
, pp. 295 - 308
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, M., Engstrom, A. S., Meyers, S., Handt, O., Saldeen, T., Haeseler, A., Pääbo, S. & Gyllensten, U. (1998). Mitochondrial DNA sequencing of shed hairs and saliva on robbery caps: sensitivity and matching probabilities. J. Forensic Sci. 43, 453–64CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Altmann, J., Alberts, S., Coote, T., Dubach, J., Geffen, E., Haines, S. A., Wayne, R. K., Muruthi, P. & Bruford, M. W. (1996). Behaviour predicts genetic structure in a wild primate group. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., USA 93, 5797–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boom, R., Sol, C. J. A., Salimans, M. M. M., Jansen, C. L., Wertheim-van Dillen, P. M. E. & Noordaa, J. (1990). Rapid and simple method for purification of nucleic acids. J. Clin. Microbiol. 28, 495–603Google ScholarPubMed
Bruford, M. W., Hanotte, O. & Burke, T. (1998). Single and multilocus DNA fingerprinting. In Molecular Genetic Analysis of Populations: A Practical Approach, 2nd edition, ed. A. R. Hoelzel, pp. 225–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Chu, J. -H., Wu, H. -Y., Yang, Y. -J., Takenaka, O. & Lin, Y. -S. (1999). Polymorphic microsatellite loci and low invasive DNA sampling inMacaca cyclopis. Primates 40, 573–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Constable, J. L., Ashley, M. V., Goodall, J. & Pusey, A. E. (2001). Noninvasive paternity assignment in Gombe chimpanzees. Mol. Ecol. 10, 1279–300CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coote, T. & Bruford, M. W. (1996). A set of human microsatellites amplify polymorphic markers in Old World Apes and Monkeys. J. Hered. 87, 406–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flagstad, Ø., Rõed, K., Stacy, J. & Jakobsen, K. S. (1999). Reliable non-invasive genotyping based on excremental PCR of nuclear DNA purified with a magnetic bead protocol. Mol. Ecol. 8, 879–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankham, R., Ballou, J. D. & Briscoe, D. A. (2002). Introduction to Conservation Genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Gagneux, P., Gonder, M. K., Goldberg, T. L. & Morin, P. A. (2001). Gene flow in wild chimpanzee populations: what genetic data tell us about chimpanzee movement over space and time. Proc. Roy. Soc. Ser. B 356, 889–97Google ScholarPubMed
Gerloff, U., Schlötterer, C., Rassmann, K., Rambold, I., Hohmann, G., Fruth, B. & Tautz, D. (1995). Amplification of hypervariable simple sequence repeats (microsatellites) from excremental DNA of wild living bonobos (Pan paniscus). Mol. Ecol. 4, 515–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonder, M. K., Oates, J. F., Disotell, T. R., Forstner, M. R. J., Morales, J. C. & Melnick, D. J. (1997). A new West African chimpanzee subspecies?Nature 388, 337CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goossens, B., Chikhi, L., Utami, S. S., Ruiter, J. R. & Bruford, M. W. (2000). A multi-samples, multi-extracts approach for microsatellite analysis of faecal samples in an arboreal ape. Cons. Genet. 1, 157–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hashimoto, C., Furuichi, T. & Takenaka, O. (1996). Matrilineal kin relationship and social behaviour of wild bonobos (Pan paniscus): sequencing the D-loop region of mitochondrial DNA. Primates 37, 305–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayakawa, S. & Takenaka, O. (1999). Urine as another potential source for template DNA in polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Am. J. Primatol. 48, 299–3043.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linch, C. A., Smith, S. L. & Prahlow, J. A. (1998). Evaluation of the human hair root for DNA typing subsequent to microscopic comparison. J. Forensic Sci. 43, 305–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linch, C. A., Whiting, D. A. & Holland, M. M. (2001). Human hair histogenesis for the mitochondrial DNA forensic scientist. . J. Forensic Sci. 46, 844–53CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morin, P. A., Moore, J. J., Chakraborthy, R., Jin, L., Goodall, J. & Woodruff, D. S. (1994). Kin selection, social structure, gene flow, and the evolution of chimpanzees. Science 265, 1193–201CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, M. A., Waits, L. P., Kendall, K. C., Wasser, S. K., Higbee, J. A. & Bogden, R. (2002). An evaluation of long-term preservation methods for brown bear (Ursus arctos) faecal DNA samples. Cons. Genet. 3, 435–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radespiel, U., Sarikaya, Z., Zimmermann, E. & Bruford, M. W. (2001) Socio-genetic structures in a free-living nocturnal primate population: sex-specific differences in the grey mouse lemur (Microcebus murinus). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 50, 493–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugiyama, Y., Kawamoto, S., Takenaka, O., Kumizaki, K. & Norikatsu, W. (1993). Paternity discrimination and inter-group relationships of chimpanzees at Bossou. Primates 34, 545–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunnucks, P. (2000). Efficient genetic markers for population biology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15, 199–203CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taberlet, P., Griffin, S., Goossens, B., Questiau, S., Manceau, V., Escaravage, N., Waits, L. P. & Bouvet, J., (1996). Reliable genotyping of samples with very low DNA quantities using PCR. Nucl. Acids Res. 24, 3189–194CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Takenaka, O., Takashi, H., Kawamoto, S., Arakawa, M. & Takenaka, A. (1993). Polymorphic microsatellite DNA amplification customised for chimpanzee paternity testing. Primates 34, 27–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valderrama, X., Karesh, W. B., Wildman, D. E. & Melnick, D. J. (1999). Non-invasive methods for collecting fresh hair tissue. Mol. Ecol. 8, 1749–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valière, N. & Taberlet, P. (2000). Urine collected in the field as a source of DNA for species and individual identification. Mol. Ecol. 9, 2149–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vigilant, L. (1999). An evaluation of techniques for the extraction and amplification of DNA from naturally shed hairs. Biol. Chem. 380, 1329–31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walsh, P. S., Metzger, D. A. & Higuchi, R. (1991). Chelex-100 as a medium for simple extraction of DNA for PCR-based typing from forensic material. Biotechniques 10, 506–13Google ScholarPubMed
Wasser, S. K., Houston, C. S., Koehler, G. M., Cadd, G. G., &Fain, S. R. (1997). Techniques for application of faecal DNA methods to field studies of Ursids. Mol. Ecol. 6, 1091–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×