Influence of molecular marker type on estimating effective population size and other genetic parameters in a critically endangered parrot
© 2024 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd..
Genetics is a fast-moving field, and for conservation practitioners or ecologists, it can be bewildering. The choice of marker used in studies is fundamental; in the literature, preference has recently shifted from microsatellites to single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci. Understanding how marker type affects estimates of population genetic parameters is important in the context of conservation, especially because the accuracy of estimates has a bearing on the actions taken to protect threatened species. We compare parameter estimates between seven microsatellites, 3761 SNP loci, and a random subset of 100 SNPs for the exact same 324 individual swift parrots, Lathamus discolor, and also use 457 additional samples from subsequent years to compare SNP estimates. Both marker types estimated a lower H O than H E. We show that microsatellites and SNPs mainly indicate a lack of spatial genetic structure, except when a priori collection locations were used on the SNP data in a discriminant analysis of principal components (DAPC). The 100-SNP subset gave comparable results to when the full dataset was used. Estimates of effective population size (N e) were comparable between markers when the same individuals were considered, but SNPs had narrower confidence intervals. This is reassuring because conservation assessments that rely on population genetic estimates based on a few microsatellites are unlikely to be nullified by the general shift toward SNPs in the literature. However, estimates between markers and datasets varied considerably when only adult samples were considered; hence, including samples of all age groups is recommended to be used when available. The estimated N e was higher for the full SNP dataset (2010-2019) than the smaller comparison data (2010-2015), which might be a better reflection of the species status. The lower precision of microsatellites may not necessarily be a barrier for most conservation applications; however, SNPs will improve confidence limits, which may be useful for practitioners.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:14 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Ecology and evolution - 14(2024), 3 vom: 30. März, Seite e11102 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Olah, George [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Comparative study |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 26.03.2024 published: Electronic-eCollection figshare: 10.6084/m9.figshare.21769493 Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1002/ece3.11102 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM370144813 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM370144813 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240327000236.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240326s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1002/ece3.11102 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1349.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM370144813 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38524913 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Olah, George |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Influence of molecular marker type on estimating effective population size and other genetic parameters in a critically endangered parrot |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 26.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic-eCollection | ||
| 500 | |a figshare: 10.6084/m9.figshare.21769493 | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2024 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. | ||
| 520 | |a Genetics is a fast-moving field, and for conservation practitioners or ecologists, it can be bewildering. The choice of marker used in studies is fundamental; in the literature, preference has recently shifted from microsatellites to single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci. Understanding how marker type affects estimates of population genetic parameters is important in the context of conservation, especially because the accuracy of estimates has a bearing on the actions taken to protect threatened species. We compare parameter estimates between seven microsatellites, 3761 SNP loci, and a random subset of 100 SNPs for the exact same 324 individual swift parrots, Lathamus discolor, and also use 457 additional samples from subsequent years to compare SNP estimates. Both marker types estimated a lower H O than H E. We show that microsatellites and SNPs mainly indicate a lack of spatial genetic structure, except when a priori collection locations were used on the SNP data in a discriminant analysis of principal components (DAPC). The 100-SNP subset gave comparable results to when the full dataset was used. Estimates of effective population size (N e) were comparable between markers when the same individuals were considered, but SNPs had narrower confidence intervals. This is reassuring because conservation assessments that rely on population genetic estimates based on a few microsatellites are unlikely to be nullified by the general shift toward SNPs in the literature. However, estimates between markers and datasets varied considerably when only adult samples were considered; hence, including samples of all age groups is recommended to be used when available. The estimated N e was higher for the full SNP dataset (2010-2019) than the smaller comparison data (2010-2015), which might be a better reflection of the species status. The lower precision of microsatellites may not necessarily be a barrier for most conservation applications; however, SNPs will improve confidence limits, which may be useful for practitioners | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Lathamus discolor | |
| 650 | 4 | |a comparative study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a effective population size | |
| 650 | 4 | |a molecular markers | |
| 650 | 4 | |a population structure | |
| 650 | 4 | |a swift parrot | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Waples, Robin S |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Stojanovic, Dejan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Ecology and evolution |d 2011 |g 14(2024), 3 vom: 30. März, Seite e11102 |w (DE-627)NLM215971345 |x 2045-7758 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:14 |g year:2024 |g number:3 |g day:30 |g month:03 |g pages:e11102 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11102 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 14 |j 2024 |e 3 |b 30 |c 03 |h e11102 | ||