4.7 Article

The case of an arctic wild ass highlights the utility of ancient DNA for validating problematic identifications in museum collections

Journal

MOLECULAR ECOLOGY RESOURCES
Volume 20, Issue 5, Pages 1182-1190

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.13130

Keywords

ancient DNA; Asiatic wild ass; Equus caballus; Equus ferus; Equus hemionus

Funding

  1. Russian Academy of Sciences Presidium
  2. Russian Ministry of Education and Science
  3. National Science Foundation [1417036]
  4. Institute of Museum and Library Services [MG-30-17-0045-17]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Museum collections are essential for reconstructing and understanding past biodiversity. Many museum specimens are, however, challenging to identify. Museum samples may be incomplete, have an unusual morphology, or represent juvenile individuals, all of which complicate accurate identification. In some cases, inaccurate identification can lead to false biogeographic reconstructions with cascading impacts on paleontological and paleoecological research. Here, we analyzed an unusual Equid mandible found in the Far North of the Taymyr peninsula that was identified morphologically as Equus hemionus, an ancestor of present-day Asiatic wild asses. If correct, this identification represents the only finding of a putative Late Pleistocene hemione in the Arctic region, and is therefore critical to understanding wild ass evolution and paleoecology. To confirm the accuracy of this specimen's taxonomic assignment, we used ancient DNA and mitochondrial hybridization capture to identify and place this specimen in the larger equid phylogeny. We find that the specimen is actually a member of E. caballus, the ancestor of domestic horses. Our study demonstrates the utility of ancient DNA to validate morphological identification, in particular of incomplete, otherwise problematic, or taxonomically unusual museum specimens.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available