首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Biology Letters >800 000 year old mammoth DNA modern elephant DNA or PCR artefact?
【2h】

800 000 year old mammoth DNA modern elephant DNA or PCR artefact?

机译:800 000岁的庞然大物DNA现代大象DNA或PCR人工制品?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Poulakakis and colleagues (Poulakakis et al. 2006: Biol. Lett. >2, 451–454), report the recovery of ‘authentic’ mammoth DNA from an 800 000-year-old fragment of bone excavated on the island of Crete. In light of results from other ancient DNA studies that indicate how DNA survival is unlikely in samples, which are recovered from warm environments and are relatively old (e.g. more than 100 000 years), these findings come as a great surprise. Here, we show that problems exist with the methodological approaches used in the study. First, the nested PCR technique as reported is nonsensical—one of the second round ‘nested’ primers falls outside the amplicon of the first round PCR. More worryingly, the binding region of one of the first round primers (Elcytb320R) falls within the short 43 base pair reported mammoth sequence, specifically covering two of the three reportedly diagnostic Elephas polymorphisms. Finally, we demonstrate using a simple Blast search in GenBank that the claimed ‘uniquely derived character state’ for mammoths is in fact also found within modern elephants.
机译:Poulakakis及其同事(Poulakakis等人,2006:Biol.Lett。> 2 ,451-454)报告说,从一个800-000年历史的骨头残骸中回收了“真实的”猛mm象DNA。克里特岛。根据其他古代DNA研究的结果表明,从温暖的环境中回收且相对较旧(例如100-000多年)的样品中DNA的存活可能性如何很小,这些发现令人惊讶。在这里,我们表明研究中使用的方法论方法存在问题。首先,所报道的巢式PCR技术是没有意义的-第二轮“嵌套”引物之一落在第一轮PCR的扩增子之外。更令人担忧的是,第一轮引物之一(Elcytb320R)的结合区落在报道的短43个碱基对的猛mm序列之内,特别是覆盖了三个报道的诊断性Elephas多态性中的两个。最后,我们通过在GenBank中进行简单的Blast搜索证明,声称的猛mm象的“唯一派生角色状态”实际上也存在于现代大象中。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号