Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

DNA detective: a review of molecular approaches to wildlife forensics

  • Review
  • Published:
Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Illegal trade of wildlife is growing internationally and is worth more than USD$20 billion per year. DNA technologies are well suited to detect and provide evidence for cases of illicit wildlife trade yet many of the methods have not been verified for forensic applications and the diverse range of methods employed can be confusing for forensic practitioners. In this review, we describe the various genetic techniques used to provide evidence for wildlife cases and thereby exhibit the diversity of forensic questions that can be addressed using currently available genetic technologies. We emphasise that the genetic technologies to provide evidence for wildlife cases are already available, but that the research underpinning their use in forensics is lacking. Finally we advocate and encourage greater collaboration of forensic scientists with conservation geneticists to develop research programs for phylogenetic, phylogeography and population genetics studies to jointly benefit conservation and management of traded species and to provide a scientific basis for the development of forensic methods for the regulation and policing of wildlife trade.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Interpol. Wildlife crime. In: Interpol. 2007. http://www.interpol.int/Public/EnvironmentCrime/Wildlife/Default.asp. Accessed 28 Mar 2008.

  2. Cook D, Roberts M, Lowther J. The international wildlife trade and organised crime: a review of the evidence and the role of the UK. Gdalming: WWF-UK; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Warchol GL. The transnational illegal wildlife trade. Crim Justice Stud. 2004;1:57–73.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Faiola A. Animal smugglers sucking life from Amazon. In: The Washington Post. Sunday 9 December 2001. http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/brazil/smuggling.htm. Accessed 25 Mar 2008.

  5. Alacs EA, Georges A. Wildlife across our borders: a review of the illegal trade in Australia. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2008;40:107–23.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Claridge G, Chea-Leth V, Chhoan IV. The effectiveness of law enforcement against forest and wildlife crime. A study of enforcement disincentives and other relevant factors in Southwestern Cambodia. Report prepared for East–West Management Institute, Conservation International and USAid. 2005. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadf439.pdf. Accessed 21 Mar 2008.

  7. Leader-Williams N, Milner-Gulland EJ. Policies for the enforcement of wildlife laws: the balance between detection and penalties in Luangwa Valley, Zambia. Conserv Biol. 1993;7:611–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Li YM, Gao ZX, Li XH, Wang S, Niemela J. Illegal wildlife trade in the Himalayan region of China. Biodiv Conserv. 2000;9:901–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Courchamp F, Angulo E, Rivalan P, Hall RJ, Signoret L, Bull L, et al. Rarity value and species extinction: the anthropogenic allee effect. Plos Biol. 2006;4:2405–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Turtle Conservation Fund. A global action plan for conservation of tortoises and freshwater turtles. Strategy and funding prospectus 2002–2007. Conservation International and Chelonian Research Foundation. Washington DC;2002.

  11. Van Dijk PP, Stuart BL, Rhodin AGJ. Asian turtle trade: proceedings of a workshop on conservation and trade of freshwater turtles and tortoises in Asia. In: Chelonian Research Monographs Chelonian Research Foundation, Lunenburg, MA;2000.

  12. Davic RD. Linking keystone species and functional groups: a new operational definition of the keystone species concept—response. Conserv Ecol. 2003;7:r11.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kotliar NB. Application of the new keystone-species concept to prairie dogs: how well does it work? Conserv Biol. 2000;14:1715–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mills LS, Soule ME, Doak DF. The keystone species in ecology and conservation. Bioscience. 1993;43:219–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. IUCN. 2004 IUCN red list of threatened species. A global species assessment. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge;2004.

  16. Lips KR, Brem F, Brenes R, Reeve JD, Alford RA, Voyles J, et al. Emerging infectious disease and the loss of biodiversity in a Neotropical amphibian community. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:3165–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pedersen AB, Jones KE, Nunn CL, Altizer S. Infectious diseases and extinction risk in wild mammals. Conserv Biol. 2007;21:1269–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Skerratt LF, Berger L, Speare R, Cashins S, McDonald KR, Phillott AD, et al. Spread of chytridiomycosis has caused the rapid global decline and extinction of frogs. Ecohealth. 2007;4:125–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith KF, Sax DF, Lafferty KD. Evidence for the role of infectious disease in species extinction and endangerment. Conserv Biol. 2006;20:1349–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Spinks PQ, Shaffer HB. Conservation phylogenetics of the Asian box turtles (Geoemydidae, Cuora): mitochondrial introgression, numts, and inferences from multiple nuclear loci. Conserv Genet. 2007;8:641–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Keller RP, Lodge DM. Species invasions from commerce in live aquatic organisms: problems and possible solutions. Bioscience. 2007;57:428–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Normile D. Invasive species—expanding trade with China creates ecological backlash. Science. 2004;306:968–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Reed RN. An ecological risk assessment of non-native boas and pythons as potentially invasive species in the United States. Risk Anal. 2005;25:753–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Weigle SM, Smith LD, Carlton JT, Pederson J. Assessing the risk of introducing exotic species via the live marine species trade. Conserv Biol. 2005;19:213–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wong K-L, Wang J, But PP-H, Shaw P-C. Application of cytochrome b DNA sequences for the authentication of endangered snake species. Forensic Sci Int. 2004;139:49–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hedmark E, Ellegren H. Microsatellite genotyping of DNA isolated from claws left on tanned carnivore hides. Int J of Legal Med. 2005;119:370–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Chapman DD, Abercrombie DL, Douady CJ, Pikitch EK, Stanhope MJ, Shivji MS. A streamlined, bi-organelle, multiplex PCR approach to species identification: application to global conservation and trade monitoring of the great white shark, Carcharodon carcharias. Conserv Genet. 2003;4:415–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Moore MK, Bemiss JA, Rice SM, Quattro JM, Woodley CM. Use of restriction fragment length polymorphisms to identify sea turtle eggs and cooked meats to species. Conserv Genet. 2003;4:95–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Branicki W, Kupiec T, Pawlowski R. Validation of cytochrome b sequence analysis as a method of species identification. J Forensic Sci. 2003;48:83–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Prado M, Franco C, Fente C, Cepeda A, Vázquez B, Barros-Velázquez. Comparison of extraction methods for the recovery amplification and species-specific analysis of DNA from bone and bone meals. Electrophoresis. 2002;23:1005–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wasser SK, Mailand C, Booth R, Mutayoba B, Kisamo E, Clark B, et al. Using DNA to track the origin of the largest ivory seizure since the 1989 trade ban. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:4228–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wasser SK, Shedlock AM, Comstock K, Ostrander EA, Mutayoba B, Stephens M. Assigning African elephant DNA to geographic region of origin: applications to the ivory trade. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:14847–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hsieh HM, Huang LH, Tsai LC, Kuo YC, Meng HH, Linacre A, et al. Species identification of rhinoceros horns using the cytochrome b gene. For Sci Int. 2003;136:1–11.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Lo CF, Lin YR, Chang HC, Lin JH. Identification of turtle shell and its preparations by PCR-DNA sequencing method. J Food Drug Anal. 2006;14:153–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Rudnick JA, Katzner TE, Bragin EA, DeWoody JA. Species identification of birds through genetic analysis of naturally shed feathers. Mol Ecol Notes. 2007;7:752–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kumar R, Singh PJ, Nagpure NS, Kushwaha B, Srivastava SK, Lakra WS. A non-invasive technique for rapid extraction of DNA from fish scales. Indian J Exp Biol. 2007;45:992–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Randi E. Mitochondrial DNA. In: Baker AJ, editor. Molecular methods in ecology. Malden: Blackwell Science; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kocher TD, Thomas WK, Meyer A, Edwards SV, Paabo S, Villablanca FX, et al. Dynamics of mitochondrial DNA evolution in animals: amplification and sequencing with conserved primers. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 1989;86:6196–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Mullis KB, Ferré F, Gibbs RA. The polymerase chain reaction. Birkhäuser: Boston; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Alacs E, Alpers D, de Tores P, Dillon M, Spencer PBS. Identifying the presence of quokkas (Setonix brachyurus) and other macropods using cytochrome b analyses from faeces. Wildlife Res. 2003;30:41–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Dawnay N, Ogden R, McEwing R, Carvalho GR, Thorpe RS. Validation of the barcoding gene CO1 for use in forensic genetic species identification. For Sci Int. 2007;173:1–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Hsieh HM, Chiang HL, Tsai LC, Lai SY, Huang NE, Linacre A, et al. Cytochrome b gene for species identification of the conservation animals. For Sci Int. 2001;122:7–18.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Verma SK, Singh L. Novel universal primers establish identity of an enormous number of animal species for forensic application. Mol Ecol Notes. 2003;3:28–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Yau FCF, Wong KL, Shaw PC, But PPH, Wang J. Authentication of snakes used in Chinese medicine by sequence characterized amplified region (SCAR). Biodiv Conserv. 2002;11:1653–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Malik S, Wilson PJ, Smith RJ, Lavigne DM, White BN. Pinniped penises in trade: a molecular-genetic investigation. Conserv Biol. 1997;11:1365–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lee JC, Tsai L-C, Huang M-T, Jhuang J-A, Yao C-T, Chin S-C, et al. A novel strategy for avian species identification by cytochrome b gene. Electrophoresis. 2008;29:2413–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Wan QH, Fang SG. Application of species-specific polymerase chain reaction in the forensic identification of tiger species. For Sci Int. 2003;131:75–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Ronaghi M, Uhlen M, Nyren P. A sequencing method based on real-time pyrophosphate. Science. 1998;281:363.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Karlsson AO, Holmlund G. Identification of mammal species using species-specific DNA pyrosequencing. Forensic Sci Int. 2007;173:16–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ballard JWO, Whitlock MC. The incomplete natural history of mitochondria. Mol Ecol. 2004;13:729–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Durand JD, Collet A, Chow S, Guinand B, Borsa P. Nuclear and mitochondrial DNA markers indicate unidirectional gene flow of Indo-Pacific to Atlantic bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus) populations, and their admixture off southern Africa. Mar Biol. 2005;147:313–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Breton S, Beaupre HD, Stewart DT, Hoeh WR, Blier PU. The unusual system of doubly uniparental inheritance of mtDNA: isn’t one enough? Trends Genet. 2007;23:465–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Kvist L, Martens J, Nazarenko AA, Orell M. Paternal leakage of mitochondrial DNA in the great tit (Parus major). Mol Biol Evol. 2003;20:243–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Rokas A, Ladoukakis, Zouros E. Animal mitochondrial DNA recombination revisited. Trends Ecol Evol. 2003;18:411–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Sherengul W, Kondo R, Matsuura ET. Analysis of paternal transmission of mitochondrial DNA in Drosophila. Genes Genetic Syst. 2006;81:399–404.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Ujvari B, Dowton M, Madsen T. Mitochondrial DNA recombination in a free-ranging Australian lizard. Biol Lett. 2007;3:189–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Arctander P. Comparison of a mitochondrial gene and a corresponding nuclear pseudogene. Proc R Soc London Ser B. 1995;262:13–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Parr RL, Maki J, Reguly B, Dakubo GD, Aguirre A, Wittock R, et al. The pseudo-mitochondrial genome influences mistakes in heteroplasmy interpretation. BMC Genomics. 2006;7:185.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Thalmann O, Hebler J, Poinar HN, Paabo S, Vigilant L. Unreliable mtDNA data due to nuclear insertions: a cautionary tale from analysis of humans and other great apes. Mol Ecol. 2004;13:321–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Behura SK. Analysis of nuclear copies of mitochondrial sequences in honeybee (Apis mellifera) genome. Mol Biol Evol. 2007;24:1492–505.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Podnar M, Haring E, Pinsker W, Mayer W. Unusual origin of a nuclear pseudogene in the Italian wall lizard: intergenomic and interspecific transfer of a large section of the mitochondrial genome in the genus Podarcis (Lacertidae). J Mol Evol. 2007;64:308–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Xu JP, Zhang QQ, Xu XF, Wang ZG, Qi J. Intragenomic variability and pseudogenes of ribosomal DNA in stone flounder Kareiius bicoloratus. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2009;52:157–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Saville BJ, Kohli Y, Anderson JB. mtDNA recombination in a natural population. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 1998;95:1331–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Brower AVZ, DeSalle R, Vogler A. Gene trees, species trees, and systematics: a cladistic perspective. Ann Rev Ecol Syst. 1996;27:423–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Maddison WP. Gene trees in species trees. Syst Biol. 1997;46:523–36.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Page RDM. Extracting species trees from complex gene trees: reconciled trees and vertebrate phylogeny. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2000;14:89–106.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Sites JW, Davis SK, Guerra T, Iverson JB, Snell HL. Character congruence and phylogenetic signal in molecular and morphological data sets: a case study in the living iguanas (Squamata, Iguanidae). Mol Biol Evol. 1996;13:1087–105.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. An J, Lee MY, Min MS, Lee MH, Lee H. A molecular genetic approach for species identification of mammals and sex determination of birds in a forensic case of poaching from South Korea. For Sci Int. 2007;167:59–61.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Cassidy BG, Gonzales RA. DNA testing in animal forensics. J Wildl Manage. 2005;69:1454–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Ebach MC, Holdrege C. DNA barcoding is no substitute for taxonomy. Nature. 2005;434:697.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Fernandes CA, Ginja C, Pereira I, Tenreiro R, Bruford MW, Santos-Reis M. Species-specific mitochondrial DNA markers for identification of non-invasive samples from sympatric carnivores in the Iberian Peninsula. Conserv Genet. 2008;9:681–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Upholt WB. Estimation of DNA-sequence divergence from comparison of restriction endonuclease digests. Nucleic Acids Res. 1977;4:1257–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Bravi CM, Liron JP, Rippoli MV, Peral-Gracia P, Giovambattista G. A simple method for domestic animal identification in Argentina using PCR-RFLP analysis of cytochrome b gene. Legal Med. 2004;6:246–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Vandamme A. Basic concepts of molecular evolution. In: Salemi M, Vandamme A, editors. The phylogenetic handbook. A practical approach to DNA and protein phylogeny. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Rosenberg NA. The probability of topological concordance of gene trees and species trees. Theor Pop Biol. 2002;61:225–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Sanderson MJ, Shaffer HB. Troubleshooting molecular phylogenetic analyses. Ann Rev Ecol Syst. 2002;33:49–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Bickford D, Lohman DJ, Sodhi NS, Ng PK, Meier R, Winker K, et al. Cryptic species as a window on diversity and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol. 2007;22:148–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Arnold ML. Natural hybridization as an evolutionary process. Ann Rev Ecol Syst. 1992;23:237–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Dowling TE. Secor CL the role of hybridization and introgression in the diversification of animals. Ann Rev Ecol Syst. 1997;28:593–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Crochet PA, Chen JJZ, Pons JM, Lebreton J-D, Hebert PDN, Bonhomme F. Genetic differentiation at nuclear and mitochondrial loci among large white-headed gulls: sex-biased interspecific gene flow? Evolution. 2003;57:2865–78.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Wang RX, Zhao YL. Differential barrier strength and allele frequencies in hybrid zones maintained by sex-biased hybrid incompatibilities. Heredity. 2008;100:326–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Whitworth TL, Dawson RD, Magalon H, Baudry E. DNA barcoding cannot reliably identify species of the blowfly genus Protocalliphora (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Proc R Soc London Ser B. 2007;274:1731–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Saetre GP, Borge T, Lindell J, Moum T, Primmer CR, Sheldon BC, et al. Speciation, introgressive hybridization and nonlinear rate of molecular evolution in flycatchers. Mol Ecol. 2001;10:737–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Tegelstrom H, Gelter HP. Haldane rule and sex biased gene flow between two hybridizing flycatcher species (Ficedula albicollis and F. hypoleuca, Aves, Muscicapidae). Evolution. 1990;44:2012–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Tosi AJ, Morales JC, Melnick DJ. Paternal, maternal, and biparental molecular markers provide unique windows onto the evolutionary history of macaque monkeys. Evolution. 2003;57:1419–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Vos P, Hogers R, Bleeker M, Reijans M, van de Lee T, Hornes M. AFLP—a new technique for DNA fingerprinting. Nucleic Acids Res. 1995;23:4407–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Alghanim HJ, Almirall JR. Development of microsatellite markers in Cannabis sativa for DNA typing and genetic relatedness analyses. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2003;376:1225–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Coyle HM, Palmbach T, Juliano N, Ladd C, Lee HC. An overview of DNA methods for the identification and individualization of marijuana. Croat Med J. 2003;44:315–21.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Datwyler SL, Weiblen GD. Genetic variation in hemp and marijuana (Cannabis sativa L.) according to amplified fragment length polymorphisms. J For Sci. 2006;51:371–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Hakki EE, Uz E, Sag A, Atasoy S, Akkaya MS. DNA fingerprinting of Cannabis sativa L. accessions using RAPD and AFLP markers. For Sci Int. 2003;136:31.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Coyle HM, Ladd C, Palmbach T, Lee HC. The green revolution: botanical contributions to forensics and drug enforcement. Croat Med J. 2001;42:340–5.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Lee JCI, Cole M, Linacre A. Identification of hallucinogenic fungi from the genera Psilocybe and Panaeolus by amplified fragment length polymorphism. Electrophoresis. 2000;21:1484–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Linacre A, Cole M, Lee JCI. Identifying the presence of ‘magic mushrooms’ by DNA profiling. Sci Justice. 2002;42:50–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Haig SM, Mullins TD, Forsman ED, Trail PW, Wennerberg L. Genetic identification of spotted owls, barred owls, and their hybrids: legal implications of hybrid identity. Conserv Biol. 2004;18:1347–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Congiu L, Dupanloup I, Patanello T, Fontana F, Rossi R, Arlati G, et al. Identification of interspecific hybrids by amplified fragment length polymorphism: the case of sturgeon. Mol Ecol. 2001;10:2355–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Nijman IJ, Otsen M, Verkaar ELC, de Ruijter C, Hanekamp E, Ochieng JW, et al. Hybridization of banteng (Bos javanicus) and zebu (Bos indicus) revealed by mitochondrial DNA, satellite DNA, AFLP and microsatellites. Heredity. 2003;90:10–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Bensch S, Akesson M. Ten years of AFLP in ecology and evolution: why so few animals? Mol Ecol. 2005;14:2899–914.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Bonin A, Bellemain E, Eidesen PB, Pompanon F, Brochmann C, Taberlet P. How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetics studies. Mol Ecol. 2004;13:3261–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Hong Y, Chuah A. A format for databasing and comparison of AFLP fingerprint profiles. BMC Bioinf. 2003;4:7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Clarke SC, Magnussen JE, Abercrombie DL, McAllister MK, Shivji MS. Identification of shark species composition and proportion in the Hong Kong shark fin market based on molecular genetics and trade records. Conserv Biol. 2006;20:201–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Magnussen JE, Pikitch EK, Clarke SC, Nicholson C, Hoelzel AR, Shivji MS. Genetic tracking of basking shark products in international trade. Animal Conserv. 2007;10:199–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Pank M, Stanhope M, Natanson L, Kohler N, Shivji M. Rapid and simultaneous identification of body parts from the morphologically similar sharks Carcharhinus obscurus and Carcharhinus plumbeus (Carcharhinidae) using multiplex PCR. Marine Biotechnol. 2001;3:231–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Shivji MS, Chapman DD, Pikitch EK, Raymond PW. Genetic profiling reveals illegal international trade in fins of the great white shark, Carcharodon carcharias. Conserv Genet. 2005;6:1035–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Negi MS, Devic M, Delseny M, Lakshmikumaran M. Identification of AFLP fragments linked to seed coat colour in Brassica juncea and conversion to a SCAR marker for rapid selection. Theor Appl Genet. 2000;101:146–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Perez T, Albornoz J, Dominguez A. An evaluation of RAPD fragment reproducibility and nature. Mol Ecol. 1998;7:1347–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Wu XB, Liu H, Jiang ZG. Identification primers for sika deer (Cervus nippon) from a sequence-characterised amplified region (SCAR). NZ J Zool. 2006;33:65–71.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Zhang JB, Cai ZP. Differentiation of the rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) from Atlantic salmon (Salmon salar) by the AFLP-derived SCAR. Eur Food Res Tech. 2006;223:413–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. He L, Wang SB, Miao XX, Wu H, Huang YP. Identification of necrophagous fly species using ISSR and SCAR markers. For Sci Int. 2007;168:148–53.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Avise JC, Arnold J, Martin Ball R, Bermingham E, Lamb T, Neigel JE, et al. Intraspecific phylogeography: the mitochondrial DNA bridge between population genetics and systematics. Ann Rev Ecol Syst. 1987;18:489–522.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Sanders JG, Cribbs JE, Fienberg HG, Hulburd GC, Katz LS, Palumbi SR. The tip of the tail: molecular identification of seahorses for sale in apothecary shops and curio stores in California. Conserv Genet. 2008;9:65–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Cornuet JM, Piry S, Luikart G, Estoup A, Solignac M. New methods employing multilocus genotypes to select or exclude populations as origins of individuals. Genetics. 1999;153:1989–2000.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. DeYoung RW, Demarais S, Honeycutt RL, Gonzales RA, Gee KL, Anderson JD. Evaluation of a DNA microsatellite panel useful for genetic exclusion studies in white-tailed deer. Wildlife Soc Bull. 2003;31:220–32.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Gomez-Diaz E, Gonzalez-Solis J. Geographic assignment of seabirds to their origin: combining morphologic, genetic, and biogeochemical analyses. Ecol Appl. 2007;17:1484–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Manel S, Gaggiotti OE, Waples RS. Assignment methods: matching biological questions techniques with appropriate. Trends Ecol Evol. 2005;20:136–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Ellegren H. Microsatellites: simple sequences with complex evolution. Nat Rev Genet. 2004;5:435–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Campbell D, Duchesne P, Bernatchez L. AFLP utility for population assignment studies: analytical investigation and empirical comparison with microsatellites. Mol Ecol. 2003;12:1979–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol. 2005;14:2611–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Manel S, Berthoud F, Bellemain E, Gaudeul M, Luikart G, Swenson JE, et al. Intrabiodiv consortium. A new individual-based spatial approach for identifying genetic discontinuities in natural populations. Mol Ecol. 2007;16:2031–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Maudetr C, Miller C, Bassano B, Breitenmoser-Würsten C, Gauthier D, Obexer-Ruff G, et al. Microsatellite DNA and recent statistical methods in wildlife conservation management: applications in Alpine ibex Capra ibex (ibex). Mol Ecol. 2002;11:421–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Paetkau D, Slade R, Burden M, Estoup A. Genetic assignment methods for the direct, real-time estimation of migration rate: a simulation-based exploration of accuracy and power. Mol Ecol. 2004;13:55–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Piry S, Alapetite A, Cornuet JM, Paetkau D, Baudouin L, Estoup A. GENECLASS2: a software for genetic assignment and first-generation migrant detection. J Hered. 2004;95:536–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Waples RS, Gaggiotti O. What is a population? An empirical evaluation of some genetic methods for identifying the number of gene pools and their degree of connectivity. Mol Ecol. 2006;15:1419–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Mank JE, Avise JC. Individual organisms as units of analysis: Bayesian-clustering alternatives in population genetics. Genetical Res. 2004;84:135–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  124. Guillot G, Mortier F, Estoup A. GENELAND: a computer package for landscape genetics. Mol Ecol Notes. 2005;5:712–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Velo-Anton G, Godinho R, Ayres C, Ferrand N, Rivera AC. Assignment tests applied to relocate individuals of unknown origin in a threatened species, the European pond turtle (Emys orbicularis). Amphibia-Reptilia. 2007;28:475–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Frantz AC, Pourtois JT, Heuertz M, Schley L, Flamand MC, Krier A, et al. Genetic structure and assignment tests demonstrate illegal translocation of red deer (Cervus elaphus) into a continuous population. Mol Ecol. 2006;15:3191–203.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Renshaw MA, Saillant E, Broughton RE, Gold JR. Application of hypervariable genetic markers to forensic identification of ‘wild’ from hatchery-raised red drum, Sciaenops ocellatus. For Sci Int. 2006;156:9–15.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. Baker CS, Cooke JG, Lavery S, Dalebout ML, Yu M, Funashi N, et al. Estimating the number of whales entering trade using DNA profiling and capture-recapture analysis of market products. Mol Ecol. 2007;16:2617–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Palsboll PJ, Berube M, Skaug HJ, Raymakers C. DNA registers of legally obtained wildlife and derived products as means to identify illegal takes. Conserv Biol. 2006;20:1284–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Gupta SK, Thangaraj K, Singh L. A simple and inexpensive molecular method for sexing and identification of the forensic samples of elephant origin. J For Sci. 2006;51:805–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  131. Butler JM. Forensic DNA typing. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  132. Scientific Working group on DNA Analysis Methods. Forensic Science Communications. http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/current/backissu.htm;2004. Accessed 25 Mar 2008.

  133. Howard C, Gilmore S, Robertson J, Peakall R. Application of new DNA markers for forensic examination of Cannabis sativa Seizures—developmental validation of protocols and a genetic database, NDLERF monograph series, no. 29. Hobart: National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  134. Girard JE. Criminalistic, forensic science and crime. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  135. Amorim A. Pereira L Pros and cons in the use of SNPs in forensic kinship investigation: a comparative analysis with STRs. For Sci Int. 2005;150:17–21.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  136. Budowle B. SNP typing strategies. For Sci Int. 2004;146:S139–42.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  137. Chakraborty R, Stivers DN, Su B, Zhong YX, Budowle B. The utility of short tandem repeat loci beyond human identification: implications for development of new DNA typing systems. Electrophoresis. 1999;20:1682–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Sarkar N, Kashyap VK. SNP markers in forensic testing—a preliminary study. For Sci Int. 2003;136:52–3.

    Google Scholar 

  139. Divne AM, Allen M. A DNA microarray system for forensic SNP analysis. For Sci Int. 2005;154:111–21.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  140. Schwenke PL, Rhydderch JG, Ford MJ, Marshall AR, Park LK. Forensic identification of endangered Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) using a multilocus SNP assay. Conserv Genet. 2006;7:983–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the Australian Federal Police and the University of Canberra for funding this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Applied Ecology and National Centre for Forensic Studies, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia

    E. A. Alacs & A. Georges

  2. Institute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia

    N. N. FitzSimmons

  3. Australian Federal Police, PO Box 401, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia

    J. Robertson

Authors
  1. E. A. Alacs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Georges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. N. FitzSimmons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Robertson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E. A. Alacs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Alacs, E.A., Georges, A., FitzSimmons, N.N. et al. DNA detective: a review of molecular approaches to wildlife forensics. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 6, 180–194 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-009-9131-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-009-9131-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation