4.6 Article

Validation of Spilornis cheela hoya TaqMan probes for potential gender identification of many Accipitridae species

Journal

THERIOGENOLOGY
Volume 73, Issue 3, Pages 404-411

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2009.09.024

Keywords

Accipitridae species; CHD gene; Eagle; Gender identification; Sex-specific probe; TaqMan

Funding

  1. National Science Council in Taiwan [NSC97-2622-B-037-002-CC2, NSC96-2622-B-037-003-CC3, KMU-EM-98-1.4]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that genders of Accipitridae species, with the same or similar sequences to our previously proposed Spilornis cheela hoya (S. c. hoya) chromo-helicase-DNA binding protein (CHD)-W-specific and CHD-ZW-common TaqMan probes, can be successfully determined. Eight species of Accipitridae with known genders were collected. After PCR, TA cloning, sequencing, and alignment analyses, sequence length differences of Griffiths P2/P8 PCR amplicons between CHD-Z and CHD-W genes ranged from 2 to 19 bp for these Accipitridae species, and they were unsolved in 3% agarose gel. Using our previous proposed S. c. hoya TaqMan probes, the genders of Circaetus gallicus, completely homologous to the sequences for these CHD probes, were successfully identified. With one nucleotide difference to S. c. hoya CHD-W-specific probe, gender identification of Accipiter gularis, Accipiter soloensis, Accipiter trivirgatus, Accipiter virgatus, and Butastur indicus were validated. With two nucleotide differences in the CHD-W-specific probe and one nucleotide difference in the CHD-ZW-common probe, Pernis ptilorhyncus also performed well for gender identification. In conclusion, the S. c. hoya CHD probes, coupled with the Griffiths P2/P8 primers, were validated to provide accurate and high-throughput gender identification for many Accipitridae species. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available