Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Blood, sweat and tears: a review of non-invasive DNA sampling

M.-C. Lefort, R. H. Cruickshank, K. Descovich, N. J. Adams, A. Barun, A. Emami-Khoyi, J. Ridden, V. R. Smith, R. Sprague, B. R. Waterhouse, S. Boyer
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/385120
M.-C. Lefort
Laboratoire d’Écologie et Biologie des Interactions (EBI) – UMR 7267 CNRS, Université de Poitiers, 5 rue Albert Turpain, 86073 POITIERS Cedex 9, FranceEnvironmental and Animal Sciences, Unitec Institute of Technology, 139 Carrington Road, Mt Albert, Auckland 1025, New Zealand.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: lefortmc@gmail.com stephane.boyer@univ-tours.fr
R. H. Cruickshank
Department of Ecology, Faculty of Agricultural and Life Sciences, PO Box 85084, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
K. Descovich
Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, University of Queensland, Gatton 4343, Queensland, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
N. J. Adams
Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, University of Queensland, Gatton 4343, Queensland, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A. Barun
Department of Ecology, Faculty of Agricultural and Life Sciences, PO Box 85084, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A. Emami-Khoyi
Centre for Ecological Genomics and Wildlife Conservation, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. Ridden
Department of Ecology, Faculty of Agricultural and Life Sciences, PO Box 85084, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
V. R. Smith
Department of Ecology, Faculty of Agricultural and Life Sciences, PO Box 85084, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R. Sprague
Bio-Protection Research Centre, PO Box 85084, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
B. R. Waterhouse
Bio-Protection Research Centre, PO Box 85084, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, Christchurch, New Zealand.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S. Boyer
Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte (IRBI) – UMR 7261 CNRS / Université de Tours, Parc Grandmont, 37200 Tours, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: lefortmc@gmail.com stephane.boyer@univ-tours.fr
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

SUMMARY

The use of DNA data is ubiquitous across animal sciences. DNA may be obtained from an organism for a myriad of reasons including identification and distinction between cryptic species, sex identification, comparisons of different morphocryptic genotypes or assessments of relatedness between organisms prior to a behavioural study. DNA should be obtained while minimizing the impact on the fitness, behaviour or welfare of the subject being tested, as this can bias experimental results and cause long-lasting effects on wild animals. Furthermore, minimizing impact on experimental animals is a key Refinement principle within the “3Rs” framework which aims to ensure that animal welfare during experimentation is optimised. The term ‘non-invasive DNA sampling’ has been defined to indicate collection methods that do not require capture or cause disturbance to the animal, including any effects on the behaviour or fitness. In practice this is not always the case, as the term ‘non-invasive’ is commonly used in the literature to describe studies where animals are restrained or subjected to aversive procedures. We reviewed the non-invasive DNA sampling literature for the past six years (346 papers published in 2013-2018) and uncovered the existence of a significant gap between the current use of this terminology (i.e. ‘non-invasive DNA sampling’) and its original definition. We show that 58% of the reviewed papers did not comply with the original definition. We discuss the main experimental and ethical issues surrounding the potential confusion or misuse of the phrase ‘non-invasive DNA sampling’ in the current literature and provide potential solutions. In addition, we introduce the terms ‘non-disruptive’ and ‘minimally disruptive’ DNA sampling, to indicate methods that eliminate or minimise impacts not on the physical integrity/structure of the animal, but on its behaviour, fitness and welfare, which in the literature reviewed corresponds to the situation for which an accurate term is clearly missing. Furthermore, we outline when these methods are appropriate to use.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted August 21, 2018.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Blood, sweat and tears: a review of non-invasive DNA sampling
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
Share
Blood, sweat and tears: a review of non-invasive DNA sampling
M.-C. Lefort, R. H. Cruickshank, K. Descovich, N. J. Adams, A. Barun, A. Emami-Khoyi, J. Ridden, V. R. Smith, R. Sprague, B. R. Waterhouse, S. Boyer
bioRxiv 385120; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/385120
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Blood, sweat and tears: a review of non-invasive DNA sampling
M.-C. Lefort, R. H. Cruickshank, K. Descovich, N. J. Adams, A. Barun, A. Emami-Khoyi, J. Ridden, V. R. Smith, R. Sprague, B. R. Waterhouse, S. Boyer
bioRxiv 385120; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/385120

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Ecology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (1525)
  • Biochemistry (2480)
  • Bioengineering (1738)
  • Bioinformatics (9677)
  • Biophysics (3900)
  • Cancer Biology (2971)
  • Cell Biology (4194)
  • Clinical Trials (135)
  • Developmental Biology (2627)
  • Ecology (4102)
  • Epidemiology (2031)
  • Evolutionary Biology (6898)
  • Genetics (5206)
  • Genomics (6501)
  • Immunology (2184)
  • Microbiology (6945)
  • Molecular Biology (2752)
  • Neuroscience (17281)
  • Paleontology (126)
  • Pathology (427)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (706)
  • Physiology (1057)
  • Plant Biology (2489)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (643)
  • Synthetic Biology (831)
  • Systems Biology (2689)
  • Zoology (430)