4.4 Article

Field calibration of blowfly-derived DNA against traditional methods for assessing mammal diversity in tropical forests

Journal

GENOME
Volume 59, Issue 11, Pages 1008-1022

Publisher

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING, NRC RESEARCH PRESS
DOI: 10.1139/gen-2015-0193

Keywords

camera traps; cage traps; hair traps; Malaysia; mist nets

Funding

  1. The British Council [172726351] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mammal diversity assessments based on DNA derived from invertebrates have been suggested as alternatives to assessments based on traditional methods; however, no study has field-tested both approaches simultaneously. In Peninsular Malaysia, we calibrated the performance of mammal DNA derived from blowflies (Diptera: Calliphoridae) against traditional methods used to detect species. We first compared five methods (cage trapping, mist netting, hair trapping, scat collection, and blowfly-derived DNA) in a forest reserve with no recent reports of megafauna. Blowfly-derived DNA and mist netting detected the joint highest number of species (n = 6). Only one species was detected by multiple methods. Compared to the other methods, blowfly-derived DNA detected both volant and non-volant species. In another forest reserve, rich in megafauna, we calibrated blowfly-derived DNA against camera traps. Blowfly-derived DNA detected more species (n = 11) than camera traps (n = 9), with only one species detected by both methods. The rarefaction curve indicated that blowfly-derived DNA would continue to detect more species with greater sampling effort. With further calibration, blowfly-derived DNA may join the list of traditional field methods. Areas for further investigation include blowfly feeding and dispersal biology, primer biases, and the assembly of a comprehensive and taxonomically-consistent DNA barcode reference library.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available