Register      Login
Australian Journal of Zoology Australian Journal of Zoology Society
Evolutionary, molecular and comparative zoology
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Isolation, via 454 sequencing, and characterisation of microsatellites for Phalacrocorax fuscescens, the black-faced cormorant (Aves : Phalacrocoracidae)

Julie Riordan A F , Michael G. Gardner B C D , Alison J. Fitch B and Gregory R. Johnston B E
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Environmental Future Centre, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Qld 4111, Australia.

B School of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia.

C Australian Centre for Evolutionary Biology and Biodiversity, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia.

D Evolutionary Biology Unit, South Australian Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia.

E Vertebrates Section, South Australian Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia.

F Corresponding author. Email: julie.riordan@griffithuni.edu.au

Australian Journal of Zoology 60(5) 340-342 https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO12084
Submitted: 30 August 2012  Accepted: 5 February 2013   Published: 21 February 2013

Abstract

The black-faced cormorant, Phalacrocorax fuscescens, is a brood-reducing seabird endemic to the southern waters of Australia. Microsatellite loci were isolated from genomic DNA using 454 shotgun sequencing. Thirty-one loci were tested and, of these, 16 were found to be polymorphic. Further characterisation was conducted on seven loci that were genotyped in 42 adult individuals from a single breeding colony in South Australia. The number of alleles per locus ranged from three to eight (s.d. ± 2.16), and the mean observed and expected heterozygosity was 0.66 (s.d. ± 0.249) and 0.62 (s.d. ± 0.178) respectively. We confirm that four loci conformed to Hardy–Weinberg expectations. Four other Phalacrocorax species were trialled for amplification of these four polymorphic loci. Amplification success varied between loci and species. These loci will be useful in determining genetic family structure and exploring nestling relatedness to further understand how relatedness influences competitive behaviours in brood-reducing species.

Additional keywords: 454 GS-FLX, shotgun sequencing.


References

Faircloth, B. (2008). MSATCOMMANDER: detection of microsatellite repeat arrays and automated, locus-specific primer design. Molecular Ecology Resources 8, 92–94.
MSATCOMMANDER: detection of microsatellite repeat arrays and automated, locus-specific primer design.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXivVSitL8%3D&md5=cbe40398bb3af83ba9b0b0362378bfc7CAS |

Gardner, M., Fitch, A., Bertozzi, T., and Lowe, A. (2011). Rise of the machines – recommendations for ecologists when using second generation sequencing for microsatellite development. Molecular Ecology Resources 11, 1093–1101.
Rise of the machines – recommendations for ecologists when using second generation sequencing for microsatellite development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Hayden, M., Nguyen, T., Waterman, A., and Chalmers, K. (2008). Multiplex-ready PCR: a new method for multiplexed SSR and SNP genotyping. BMC Genomics 9, 80–92.
Multiplex-ready PCR: a new method for multiplexed SSR and SNP genotyping.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 6, 65–70.

Johnston, G. R., and Wiebkin, A. (2008). Birds of Gulf St Vincent. In ‘Natural History of Gulf St Vincent’. (Eds S. A Shepherd, S. Bryars, I. Kirkegaard, P. Harbison and J. Jennings.) pp. 324–338. (Royal Society of South Australia: Adelaide.)

Kalinowski, S., Taper, M., and Marshall, T. (2007). Revising how the computer program CERVUS accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment. Molecular Ecology 16, 1099–1106.
Revising how the computer program CERVUS accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Meglécz, E. (2007). MICROFAMILY (version 1): a computer program for detecting flanking-region similarities among different microsatellite loci. Molecular Ecology Notes 7, 18–20.
MICROFAMILY (version 1): a computer program for detecting flanking-region similarities among different microsatellite loci.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Mock, D., and Parker, G. (1998). Siblicide, family conflict and the evolutionary limits of selfishness. Animal Behaviour 56, 1–10.
Siblicide, family conflict and the evolutionary limits of selfishness.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Nelson, B. (2005). ‘Pelicans, Cormorants and Their Relatives.’ (Oxford University Press: Oxford.)

Proffitt, F. (2004). Reproductive failure threatens bird colonies on North Sea coast. Science 305, 1090.
Reproductive failure threatens bird colonies on North Sea coast.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXmvFynurs%3D&md5=5d125cbff6039ba24f4c2605e0298801CAS |

Raymond, M., and Rousset, F. (1995). GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. The Journal of Heredity 86, 248–249.

Rozen, S., and Skaletsky, H. (2000). Primer3 on the WWW for general users and for biologist programmers. In ‘Bioinformatics Methods and Protocols: Methods in Molecular Biology’. (Eds S. Krawetz and S. Misener.) pp. 365–386. (Humana Press: Totowa, NJ.)

Smith, L., and Burgoyne, L. (2004). Collecting, archiving and processing DNA from wildlife samples using FTA databasing paper. BMC Ecology 4, 4–15.
Collecting, archiving and processing DNA from wildlife samples using FTA databasing paper.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2czpvFaksQ%3D%3D&md5=1713d57a1369731e0d87e450dae1ec83CAS |

Trivers, R. (1974). Parent–offspring conflict. American Zoologist 14, 249–264.

Van Oosterhout, C., Hutchinson, W., Will, D., and Shiply, P. (2004). MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Molecular Ecology Notes 4, 535–538.
MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXnvFOktb8%3D&md5=8f159c0b84827ce791b15209338a9746CAS |