Next-generation sequencing (NGS) on pooled samples has already been broadly applied in human medical diagnostics and plant and animal breeding. However, thus far it has been only sparingly employed in ecology and conservation, where it may serve as a useful diagnostic tool for rapid assessment of species genetic diversity and structure at the population level. Here we undertake a comprehensive evaluation of the accuracy, practicality and limitations of parallel tagged amplicon NGS on pooled population samples for estimating species population diversity and structure. We obtained 16S and Cyt b data from 20 populations of Leiopelma hochstetteri, a frog species of conservation concern in New Zealand, using two approaches - parallel tagged NGS on pooled population samples and individual Sanger sequenced samples. Data from each approach were then used to estimate two standard population genetic parameters, nucleotide diversity (π) and population differentiation (FST), that enable population genetic inference in a species conservation context. We found a positive correlation between our two approaches for population genetic estimates, showing that the pooled population NGS approach is a reliable, rapid and appropriate method for population genetic inference in an ecological and conservation context. Our experimental design also allowed us to identify both the strengths and weaknesses of the pooled population NGS approach and outline some guidelines and suggestions that might be considered when planning future projects.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2014.
All research outputs
#21,659,556
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#128,706
of 224,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,697
of 246,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,354
of 5,522 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 246,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,522 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
