4.3 Article

Museum specimens: An overlooked and valuable material for conservation genetics

Journal

ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH
Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 13-23

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1440-1703.12181

Keywords

conservation genetics; genetic diversity; museum; next-generation sequencing; specimen DNA

Categories

Funding

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [15J00908, 17J00965, 19K15856]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15J00908, 17J00965, 19K15856] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Museum specimens contain genetic information from when they were collected, and the technical difficulty of genetic analysis requires the use of new methods. Museum specimens are of great value for conservation genetic studies.
Museum specimens include genetic information from when they were collected. This historical information, which is very difficult to ascertain from samples collected currently, could be a valuable material for use in conservation genetics. However, the genetic analysis of museum specimens is technically difficult because of DNA fragmentation and the deamination of cytosine to uracil. In recent years, various methods have been developed for the genetic analysis of museum specimens, such as data analysis techniques including next-generation sequencing. The development of approaches that extract historical genetic information from museum specimens is expected to provide a new perspective on conservation genetics. This review focuses on the availability of museum specimens as genetic resources for conservation genetics. Some case studies are introduced, and perspectives on the future utility of conservation genetic studies using museum specimens are discussed. Moreover, recommended genetic analysis methods and important points for the usage of museum specimens are presented. This review provides a strong case for increasing the usage of museum specimens in conservation genetics studies in the future.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available