...
首页> 外文期刊>Molecular ecology resources >Unnecessary roughness? Testing the hypothesis that predators destined for molecular gut-content analysis must be hand-collected to avoid cross-contamination
【24h】

Unnecessary roughness? Testing the hypothesis that predators destined for molecular gut-content analysis must be hand-collected to avoid cross-contamination

机译:不必要的粗糙度?测试假设必须手工收集捕食者进行分子肠道含量分析,以避免交叉污染

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Molecular gut-content analysis enables detection of arthropod predation with minimal disruption of ecosystem processes. Mass-collection methods, such as sweep-netting, vacuum sampling and foliage beating, could lead to regurgitation or rupturing of predators along with uneaten prey, thereby contaminating specimens and compromising resultant gut-content data. Proponents of this 'cross-contamination hypothesis' advocate hand-collection as the best way to avoid cross-contamination. However, hand-collection is inefficient when large samples are needed, as with most ecological research. We tested the cross-contamination hypothesis by setting out onto potato plants immature Coleomegilla maculata and Podisus maculiventris that had been fed larvae of either Leptinotarsa decemlineata or Leptinotarsa juncta, or unfed individuals of these predator species along with L. decemlineata larvae. The animals were then immediately re-collected, either by knocking them vigorously off the plants onto a beat cloth and capturing them en masse with an aspirator ('rough' treatment) or by hand-searching and collection with a brush ('best practice'). Collected predators were transferred in the field to individual vials of chilled ethanol and subsequently assayed by PCR for fragments of cytochrome oxidase I of L. decemlineata and L. juncta. Ten to 39 per cent of re-collected fed predators tested positive by PCR for DNA of both Leptinotarsa species, and 14-38% of re-collected unfed predators contained L. decemlineata DNA. Overall levels of cross-contamination in the rough (31%) and best-practice (11%) samples were statistically different and supported the cross-contamination hypothesis. A pilot study on eliminating external DNA contamination with bleach prior to DNA extraction and amplification gave promising results. Published 2010. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
机译:分子肠内容物分析可以检测节肢动物的捕食行为,而对生态系统过程的破坏最小。大量收集方法,例如扫网,真空采样和树叶跳动,可能会导致食肉动物反流或破裂,并伴有未捕食的猎物,从而污染标本并损害肠道数据。支持这种“交叉污染假说”的人主张手工收集是避免交叉污染的最佳方法。但是,与大多数生态研究一样,当需要大量样本时,手动收集效率很低。我们通过在马铃薯植物上放养未成熟的鞘翅目斑潜蝇和斑潜蝇(Podisus maculiventris)来测试交叉污染假说,这些马铃薯已经喂食了小角实线虫或小扁实线虫的幼虫,或者这些食肉动物的未进食个体以及小角实线虫的幼虫。然后立即重新收集动物,方法是将它们从植物上猛烈地敲打到一块打好的布上,然后用吸气器将其大面积捕获(“粗略”处理),或者用刷子进行手工搜索和收集(“最佳做法”)。 )。将收集到的捕食者在野外转移到单个小瓶的冷乙醇中,然后通过PCR检测落叶松和拟南芥的细胞色素氧化酶I的片段。通过PCR检测到的两种Leptinotarsa物种的DNA中有10%到39%的被重新捕食的捕食者的捕食者为阳性,而未经捕食的被捕食者的再捕食者中有14%至38%含有落叶链球菌DNA。粗糙样品(31%)和最佳实践样品(11%)中的交叉污染总体水平在统计学上是不同的,并支持了交叉污染假说。一项在DNA提取和扩增之前消除漂白剂对外部DNA污染的初步研究得出了令人鼓舞的结果。 2010年出版。本文是美国政府的著作,在美国属于公共领域。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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