Multilocus DNA fingerprints in gallinaceous birds: general approach and problems

Abstract

Multilocus profiles were investigated in five different species of Galliformes (ring-necked pheasant Phasianus colchicus, Indian peafowl Pavo cristatus, Japanese quail Coturnix coturnix japonica, domestic chicken Gallus gal/us, and red grouse Lagopus lagopus scoticus) using two human multilocus probes (33.6 and 33.15) in combination with each of four restriction enzymes (A/uI, DdeI, HaeHI or Hinfl). All the species show a DNA fingerprint-like pattern using at least one restriction enzyme in combination with each multilocus probe. The number of bands detected and the value of the index of similarity for each species differ significantly between the profiles obtained with each multilocus probe. Some enzyme/probe combinations reveal strong cross-hybridization of the multilocus probes with satellite or satellite-like DNA sequences in pheasant, peacock, quail and chicken, which partially or completely prevented scoring of the profile. The choice of restriction enzyme was found to influence the number of bands, the value of the index of similarity and the probability of obtaining an identical fingerprint between unrelated individuals. The Mendelian inheritance and independent segregation of the fragments detected using AluI was investigated in three species (ring-necked pheasant, Indian peafowl and red grouse). Some bands were shown to be tightly linked. An extreme case was encountered in the red grouse, where 12 of the 15 bands scored in one parent represented only two, apparently allelic, haplotypes and so derived from a single locus. However, fingerprint patterns will often be adequate for use in paternity analyses, such as in behavioural studies, despite the occurrence of haplotypic sets of bands. Identical DNA multilocus profiles were sometimes observed between captive-bred siblings in one species. These results emphasize the desirability of determining, in each new species, the optimal experimental conditions as a preliminary to any behavioural or population genetic studies that use the multilocus DNA fingerprinting methodology.

Genetic Variability and Population Differentiation Inferred From Dna Fingerprinting in Silvereyes (Aves: Zosteropidae)

“…Despite the successful application of DNA fingerprinting to the aims of this study, the technique is not without shortcomings (see also Hanotte et al 1992). Most of these shortcomings pertain to the multilocus nature ofthe fingerprint profile that precludes the identification ofspecific alleles, simply because so many bands can be seen on a single gel, and because fragments of the same mobility are not necessarily isoallelic (Hill 1987).…”

Microsatellite variation in a social insect

“…Like multilocus fingerprints, they are usually scored through Southern blotting of agarose gels and adjacent alleles may not always be distinguishable, requiring binning strategies (Budowle et al, 1991). Moreover, they are sometimes locally distributed in the genome, so that different loci may often be linked and will therefore provide less independent information about kinship (Hanotte et al, 1992). Microsatellite loci appear to be widely and fairly uniformly distributed throughout the genome (Stallings et al, 1991;Dietrich et al, 1992).…”

DNA fingerprinting in zoology: past, present, future

“…Further applications for minisatellite analysis were also attempted, including the isolation of single locus probes for use in trait mapping and stock assignment [42-44], with mixed success. Jeffreys’ DNA fingerprinting methodology did, however, lead to the creation of some functional (though not always commercially viable) services, including animal paternity testing [45].…”