↓ Skip to main content

Long‐term persistence of horse fecal DNA in the environment makes equids particularly good candidates for noninvasive sampling

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology and Evolution, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Long‐term persistence of horse fecal DNA in the environment makes equids particularly good candidates for noninvasive sampling
Published in
Ecology and Evolution, March 2018
DOI 10.1002/ece3.3956
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah R. B. King, Kathryn A. Schoenecker, Jennifer A. Fike, Sara J. Oyler‐McCance

Abstract

Fecal DNA collected noninvasively can provide valuable information about genetic and ecological characteristics. This approach has rarely been used for equids, despite the need for conservation of endangered species and management of abundant feral populations. We examined factors affecting the efficacy of using equid fecal samples for conservation genetics. First, we evaluated two fecal collection methods (paper bag vs. ethanol). Then, we investigated how time since deposition and month of collection impacted microsatellite amplification success and genotyping errors. Between May and November 2014, we collected feral horse fecal samples of known age each month in a feral horse Herd Management Area in western Colorado and documented deterioration in the field with photographs. Samples collected and dried in paper bags had significantly higher amplification rates than those collected and stored in ethanol. There was little difference in the number of loci that amplified per sample between fresh fecal piles and those that had been exposed to the environment for up to 2 months (in samples collected in paper bags). After 2 months of exposure, amplification success declined. When comparing fresh (0-2 months) and old (3-6 months) fecal piles, samples from fresh piles had more matching genotypes across samples, better amplification success and less allelic dropout. Samples defecated during the summer and collected within 2 months of deposition had highest number of genotypes matching among samples, and lowest rates of amplification failure and allelic dropout. Due to the digestive system and amount of fecal material produced by equids, as well as their occurrence in arid ecosystems, we suggest that they are particularly good candidates for noninvasive sampling using fecal DNA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 29%
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Professor 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 8%
Environmental Science 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 01 July 2022.
All research outputs
#3,139,925
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Ecology and Evolution
#1,849
of 8,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,851
of 345,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology and Evolution
#47
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,478 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
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 345,388 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.