Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Evaluating mixed samples as a source of error in non-invasive genetic studies using microsatellites.

Molecular ecology - 1 Jan 2005

Roon David A, Thomas Miranda E, Kendall Katherine C, Waits Lisette P

Abstract excerpt

The use of noninvasive genetic sampling (NGS) for surveying wild populations is increasing rapidly. Currently, only a limited number of studies have evaluated potential biases associated with NGS. This paper evaluates the potential errors associated with analysing mixed samples drawn from multiple animals. Most NGS studies assume that mixed samples will be identified and removed during the genotyping process. We...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Gene Amplification
Share to Genotype
Share to Hair

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy Delete account & data About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Microsatellite Repeats

Share to Selection Bias

Share to Species Specificity

Share to Ursidae

Source

Identifiers

PMID: 15643963
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02385.x

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 7 Sept 2026. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-09-08.1.

Source receipt: pubmed, retrieved 7 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence. Graph snapshot: 2026-09-29.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Evaluating mixed samples as a source of error in non-invasive genetic studies using microsatellites.PMID 15643963Read ↗

When can noninvasive samples provide sufficient information in conservation genetics studies?Semantic proximity Read ↗

Microsatellites behaving badly: empirical evaluation of genotyping errors and subsequent impacts on population studies.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Microsatellite genotyping errors: detection approaches, common sources and consequences for paternal exclusion.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Individual genotypes from environmental DNA: Fingerprinting snow tracks of three large carnivore species.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Genotyping errors in a calibrated DNA register: implications for identification of individuals.Semantic proximity Read ↗

How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetics studies.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Quantifying genotyping errors in noninvasive population genetics.Semantic proximity Read ↗

An empirical exploration of data quality in DNA-based population inventories.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Environmental DNA from Residual Saliva for Efficient Noninvasive Genetic Monitoring of Brown Bears (Ursus arctos).Semantic proximity Read ↗

Microsatellite scoring errors associated with noninvasive genotyping based on nuclear DNA amplified from shed hair.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Who are you? A framework to identify and report genetic sample mix-ups.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Highly Versatile, Non-Invasive Method for Collecting Buccal DNA from Free-Ranging Non-Human PrimatesSemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.