Sex Determination of the Gallus Gallus
Sample Methodologies for DNA Extraction and PCR for gender identification of Gallus gallus domesticus
INTRODUCTION:
DNA extraction and PCR have been used in numerous research projects, current research commonly utilise such techniques for the basis of their study and as economic cost of the proceduredecreases it will become even more prevalent in industrial and commercial settings.
A variety of methods collection can be employed in order to extract DNA; the methods chosen can however directly affect the results obtained. Destructive methods such as muscle DNA extraction usually present samples of high quality but would require harming the organism for extraction, similarly blood DNA extraction would be of comparablequality but would be less detrimental than a muscle biopsy. The indirect method (feather) would be difficult to extract DNA as the quality of DNA would be poor however it wouldn’t require harming the species. The difference in quality of the expected DNA extraction would in turn reflect the amount of DNA concentration available; higher quality DNA specimens generallyhave a higher concentration of DNA. Differences between the availability of specimens can also differ between these methods; feathers are highly available for analysis while blood and muscle would be scarce in comparison. Blood and muscle specimens would require cold storage in order to prevent DNA degradation, unlike feather samples which would most likely be degraded.
The identification of gender in birds has always been problematic; few species have distinct visual cues (sexual dimorphism) in accordance to their gender. Sexually monomorphic species are present in the wild and are difficult to identify,in addition to this bird progeny are often monomorphic in their development, and hence early determination of gender would be similarly difficult.In regards to Gallus gallus domesticus, the common chicken this difficulty in gender identification is quite evident in their progeny.After
INTRODUCTION:
DNA extraction and PCR have been used in numerous research projects, current research commonly utilise such techniques for the basis of their study and as economic cost of the proceduredecreases it will become even more prevalent in industrial and commercial settings.
A variety of methods collection can be employed in order to extract DNA; the methods chosen can however directly affect the results obtained. Destructive methods such as muscle DNA extraction usually present samples of high quality but would require harming the organism for extraction, similarly blood DNA extraction would be of comparablequality but would be less detrimental than a muscle biopsy. The indirect method (feather) would be difficult to extract DNA as the quality of DNA would be poor however it wouldn’t require harming the species. The difference in quality of the expected DNA extraction would in turn reflect the amount of DNA concentration available; higher quality DNA specimens generallyhave a higher concentration of DNA. Differences between the availability of specimens can also differ between these methods; feathers are highly available for analysis while blood and muscle would be scarce in comparison. Blood and muscle specimens would require cold storage in order to prevent DNA degradation, unlike feather samples which would most likely be degraded.
The identification of gender in birds has always been problematic; few species have distinct visual cues (sexual dimorphism) in accordance to their gender. Sexually monomorphic species are present in the wild and are difficult to identify,in addition to this bird progeny are often monomorphic in their development, and hence early determination of gender would be similarly difficult.In regards to Gallus gallus domesticus, the common chicken this difficulty in gender identification is quite evident in their progeny.After
References: Brody, J. R., and S. E. Kern(2004)Sodium boric acid: a Tris-free, cooler conductive medium for DNA electrophoresis.BioTechniques36:214-216 Chue J,Smith CA(2011)Sex determination and sexual differentiation in the avian model.FEBS J278, 1027–1034. Ito H, Sudo-Yamaji A,Abe M,Murase T,Tsubota T (2003)Sex identification by alternative polymerase chain reaction methods in Falconiformes.Zoological Science20: 339–344. McDonald P, GRIFFITH S (2011)To pluck or not to pluck: the hidden ethical and scientific costs of relying on feathers as a primary source of DNA.Journal of Avian Biology 42 (3): 197- 203 . Porat N, Bogdanov K, Danielli A, Arie A, Samina I, Hadani A (2011)Direct detection of chicken genomic DNA for gender determination by thymine-DNA glycosylase.British Poultry Science Vol. 52, Issue. 1: 58-65 Sherman C (2011) Determining the sex of the domestic chicken (Gallus gallus), Genetics of Populations Practical Manual, Deakin University, Burwood. Shikano T, Herczeg G, Merilä J(2011)Molecular sexing and population genetic inference using a sex-linked microsatellite marker in the nine-spined stickleback (Pungitiuspungitius).BMC Research Notes4: 119.