Skip to main content
Log in

A comparison of conservative DNA extraction methods from fins and scales of freshwater fish: A useful tool for conservation genetics

  • Published:
Conservation Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Cronin MA, Spearman WJ, Wilmot RL, Patton JC, Bickham JW (1993) Mitochondrial DNA Variation in Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytsha) and Chum Salmon (O. Keta) detected by restriction enzyme analysis of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products. Can. J. Fish Aquat. Sci. 50, 708–715

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen MM, Jensen LF (2005) Sibship within samples of brown trout (Salmo trutta) and implications for supportive breeding. Conserv. Genet. 6:297–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman J, Amos W (2005) Microsatellite genotyping errors: detection approaches common sources and consequences for paternal exclusion. Mol. Ecol. 14:599–612

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Launey S, Krief F, Morin J, Laroche J (2003) Five new microsatellite markers for northern pike (Esox lucius). Mol. Ecol. Notes 3:366–368

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lucentini L, Palomba A, Lancioni H, Natali M, Panara F (2006) A non-destructive, rapid, reliable and inexpensive method to sample, store and extract high-quality DNA from fish body mucus and buccal cells. Mol. Ecol. Notes., 6:257–260

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miller LM, Kapuscinski AR (1997) Historical analysis of genetic variation reveals low effective population size in a northern pike (Esox lucius) population. Genetics 147:1249–1258

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen EE, Hansen MM, Loeschcke V (1999) Analysis of DNA from old scale samples: technical, applications and perspectives for conservation. Hereditas 130:265–276

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Presa P, Guyomard R (1996) Conservation of microsatellites in three species of Salmonids. J. Fish Biol. 49:1326–1329

    Google Scholar 

  • Roon DA, Thomas ME, Kendall KC, Waits LP (2005) Evaluating mixed samples as a source of error in non-invasive genetic studies using microsatellites. Mol. Ecol. 14:195–201

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Willis DPM, Shipley P (2004) MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol. Ecol. Notes 4:535–538

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wasko AP, Martins C, Oliveira C, Foresti F (2003) Non-destructive genetic sampling in fish. An improved method for DNA extraction from fish fins and scales. Hereditas 138:161–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to A.Vignati, for critically reading the English manuscript. This work was supported by grants of University of Perugia and Italian MiPAF.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Livia Lucentini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lucentini, L., Caporali, S., Palomba, A. et al. A comparison of conservative DNA extraction methods from fins and scales of freshwater fish: A useful tool for conservation genetics. Conserv Genet 7, 1009–1012 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-006-9137-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-006-9137-6

Keywords

Navigation