Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 565

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genotyping‐by‐sequencing in ecological and conservation genomics

Open access
Narum, Shawn R., Buerkle, C. Alex, Davey, John W., Miller, Michael R., Hohenlohe, Paul A.·2013·Molecular Ecology

Abstract

The fields of ecological and conservation genetics have developed greatly in recent decades through the use of molecular markers to investigate organisms in their natural habitat and to evaluate the effect of anthropogenic disturbances. However, many of these studies have been limited to narrow regions of the genome, allowing for limited inferences but making it difficult to generalize about the organisms and their evolutionary history. Tremendous advances in sequencing technology over the last decade (i.e. next-generation sequencing; NGS) have led to the ability to sample the genome much more densely and to observe the patterns of genetic variation that result from the full range of evolutionary processes acting across the genome (Allendorf et al. 2010; Stapley et al. 2010; Li et al. 2012). These studies are transforming molecular ecology by making many long-standing questions much more easily accessible in almost any organism. When studying the genetics of wild populations, it is desirable to samples tens, hundreds or even thousands of individuals. While it is now possible to sequence whole genomes for tens of individuals with small genome sizes, the sequencing of hundreds of individuals with large genomes remains prohibitively expensive, particularly where the genome sequence is unknown. Further, for the purpose of many studies, complete genomic sequence data for all individuals would be unnecessary and simply inflate the computational and bioinformatic costs. A major recent advance has been the development of genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) approaches that allow a targeted fraction of the genome (a reduced representation library) to be sequenced with next-generation technology rather than the entire genome, even in species with little or no previous genomic information and large genomes. The subset of the genome to be sequenced in these GBS approaches may be targeted using restriction enzymes or capture probes or by sequencing the transcriptome (reviewed in Davey et al. 2011). In the future, as sequencing technology and computational and bioinformatic methods develop further, whole-genome resequencing may become the predominant method for ecological and conservation genomics. Currently, reduced representation approaches offer the ability to not only discover genetic variants such as SNPs but also genotype individuals at these newly discovered loci in the same data. This special issue on ‘Genotyping-by-Sequencing in Ecological and Conservation Genomics’ represents a diverse set of empirical and theoretical studies that demonstrate both the utility and some of the challenges of GBS in ecological and conservation genomics. The empirical studies include demonstrations of the utility of GBS for population genomics and association mapping, as well as the development of genomic resources (i.e. large SNP data sets) for target species. The studies also illustrate some of the differences between GBS methods, in particular, aligning paired-end reads to achieve longer consensus sequences in contrast to single-end reads with shorter alignments, and double-digest versus sonication methods to fragment DNA. In addition, several papers describe advanced data pipelines for handling GBS-related sequence data and critically evaluate best practices for GBS methods and potential biases and novel features associated with GBS data. Overall, this compilation of papers emphasizes that GBS has been quickly adopted by the scientific community and is expected to become a common tool for studies in molecular ecology.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/mec.12350

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 47 references

Cited by

See all 565

Metadata

Authors
Narum, S. R., Buerkle, C. A., Davey, J. W., Miller, M. R., & Hohenlohe, P. A.
Venue
Molecular Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-05-25
Volume
22
Issue
11
Pages
2841-2847
ISSN
  • 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-294X
OpenAlex
W2124146565
Cited by
565
References
47
FWCI
39.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Genotyping‐by‐sequencing in ecological and conservation genomics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/mec.12350
The paper
Narum, S. R., Buerkle, C. A., Davey, J. W., Miller, M. R., & Hohenlohe, P. A. (2013). Genotyping‐by‐sequencing in ecological and conservation genomics. Molecular Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12350

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.