The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples – a case study on DNA in faeces
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Poorly preserved biological tissues have become an important source of DNA for a wide range of zoological studies. Measuring the quality of DNA obtained from these samples is often desired; however, there are no widely used techniques available for quantifying damage in highly degraded DNA samples. We present a general method that can be used to determine the frequency of polymerase blocking DNA damage in specific gene-regions in such samples. The approach uses quantitative PCR to measure the amount of DNA present at several fragment sizes within a sample. According to a model of random degradation the amount of available template will decline exponentially with increasing fragment size in damaged samples, and the frequency of DNA damage (lambda) can be estimated by determining the rate of decline. RESULTS: The method is illustrated through the analysis of DNA extracted from sea lion faecal samples. Faeces contain a complex mixture of DNA from several sources and different components are expected to be differentially degraded. We estimated the frequency of DNA damage in both predator and prey DNA within individual faecal samples. The distribution of fragment lengths for each target fit well with the assumption of a random degradation process and, in keeping with our expectations, the estimated frequency of damage was always less in predator DNA than in prey DNA within the same sample (mean lambda(predator) = 0.0106 per nucleotide; mean lambda(prey) = 0.0176 per nucleotide). This study is the first to explicitly define the amount of template damage in any DNA extracted from faeces and the first to quantify the amount of predator and prey DNA present within individual faecal samples. CONCLUSION: We present an approach for characterizing mixed, highly degraded PCR templates such as those often encountered in ecological studies using non-invasive samples as a source of DNA, wildlife forensics investigations and ancient DNA research. This method will allow researchers to measure template quality in order to evaluate alternate sources of DNA, different methods of sample preservation and different DNA extraction protocols. The technique could also be applied to study the process of DNA decay.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA
Lindahl, T. (1993) · Nature · doi:10.1038/362709a0 · Cited by 5,679
Reliable genotyping of samples with very low DNA quantities using PCR
Taberlet, P. (1996) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/24.16.3189 · Cited by 1,491
Hofreiter, M. (2001) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/29.23.4793 · Cited by 684
Cited by
Environmental DNA – An emerging tool in conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity
Thomsen, P. F., & Willerslev, E. (2015) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.019 · Cited by 2,082
The half-life of DNA in bone: measuring decay kinetics in 158 dated fossils
Allentoft, M. E., Collins, M., Harker, D., Haile, J., Oskam, C. L., Hale, M. L., Campos, P. F., Samaniego, J. A., Gilbert, M. T. P., Willerslev, E., et al. (2012) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1745 · Cited by 633
Ancient and modern environmental DNA
Pedersen, M. W., Overballe-Petersen, S., Ermini, L., Sarkissian, C. D., Haile, J., Hellstrom, M., Spens, J., Thomsen, P. F., Bohmann, K., Cappellini, E., et al. (2015) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2013.0383 · Cited by 329
Improving access to endogenous DNA in ancient bones and teeth
Damgaard, P. B., Margaryan, A., Schroeder, H., Orlando, L., Willerslev, E., & Allentoft, M. E. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep11184 · Cited by 276
Archaeological collagen: why worry about collagen diagenesis?
Dobberstein, R. C., Collins, M. J., Craig, O. E., Taylor, G., Penkman, K. E. H., & Ritz-Timme, S. (2009) · Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences · doi:10.1007/s12520-009-0002-7 · Cited by 157
Intrinsic challenges in ancient microbiome reconstruction using 16S rRNA gene amplification
Ziesemer, K. A., Mann, A. E., Sankaranarayanan, K., Schroeder, H., Ozga, A. T., Brandt, B. W., Zaura, E., Waters-Rist, A., Hoogland, M., Salazar-García, D. C., et al. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep16498 · Cited by 148
Metadata
- Authors
- Deagle, B. E., Eveson, J. P., & Jarman, S. N.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Zoology
- Published
- 2006-08-16
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11-11
- ISSN
- 1742-9994 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2124124158
- Cited by
- 410
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 11.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
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.