Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:43:28.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using faecal DNA to determine consumption by kangaroos of plants considered palatable to sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2009

K. W. Ho ,
G. L. Krebs ,
P. McCafferty ,
S. P. van Wyngaarden  and
J. Addison
K. W. Ho*
Affiliation:
ChemCentre, 125 Hay Street, East Perth, WA 6004, Australia
G. L. Krebs
Affiliation:
EH Graham Centre, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia
P. McCafferty
Affiliation:
ChemCentre, 125 Hay Street, East Perth, WA 6004, Australia
S. P. van Wyngaarden
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Food, 55 McDonald Street, Kalgoorlie, WA 6430, Australia
J. Addison
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Food, 55 McDonald Street, Kalgoorlie, WA 6430, Australia
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Disagreement exists within the scientific community with regards to the level of competition for feed between sheep and kangaroos in the Australian rangelands. The greatest challenge to solving this debate is finding effective means of determining the composition of the diets of these potential grazing competitors. An option is to adopt a non-invasive approach that combines faecal collection and molecular techniques that focus on faecal DNA as the primary source of dietary information. As proof-of-concept, we show that a DNA reference data bank on plant species can be established. This DNA reference data bank was then used as a library to identify plant species in kangaroo faeces collected in the southern rangelands of Western Australia. To enhance the method development and to begin the investigation of competitive grazing between sheep and kangaroos, 16 plant species known to be palatable to sheep were initially targeted for collection. To ensure that only plant sequences were studied, PCR amplification was performed using a universal primer pair previously shown to be specific to the chloroplast transfer RNA leucine (trnL) UAA gene intron. Overall, genus-specific, single and differently sized amplicons were reliably and reproducibly generated; enabling the differentiation of reference plants by PCR product length heterogeneity. However, there were a few plants that could not be clearly differentiated on the basis of size alone. This prompted the adoption of a post-PCR step that enabled further differentiation according to base sequence variation. Restriction endonucleases make sequence-specific cleavages on DNA to produce discrete and reproducible fragments having unique sizes and base compositions. Their availability, affordability and simplicity-of-use put restriction enzyme sequence (RES) profiling as a logical post-PCR step for confirming plant species identity. We demonstrate that PCR–RES profiling of plant and faecal matter is useful for the identification of plants included in the diet of kangaroos. The limitations, potential and the opportunities created for researchers interested in investigating the diet of competing herbivores in the rangelands are discussed.

Keywords

faecal DNAdietary componentskangaroosrangelands
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , February 2010 , pp. 282 - 288
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Dawson, TJ, Ellis, BA 1996. Diets of mammalian herbivores in Australian arid, hilly shrublands: seasonal effects on overlap between euros (hill kangaroos), sheep and feral goats, and on dietary niche breadths and electivities. Journal of Arid Environments 34, 491–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deagle, BE, Tollit, DJ, Jarman, SN, Hindell, MA, Trites, AW, Gales, NJ 2005. Molecular scatology as a tool to study diet: analysis of prey DNA in scats from captive Stellar sea lions. Molecular Ecology 14, 1831–1842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dove, H, Mayes, RW 2005. Using n-alkanes and other plant wax components to estimate intake, digestibility and diet composition of grazing/browsing sheep and goats. Small Ruminant Research 59, 123–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gielly, L, Taberlet, P 1994. The use of chloroplast DNA to resolve plant phylogenies: noncoding versus rbcL sequences. Molecular Biology and Evolution 11, 769–777.Google ScholarPubMed
Heinze, B 2007. A database of PCR primers for the study of the chloroplast genome in plants (version 2.1). The Austrian Federal Research Centre for Forests, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Holechek, JL, Pieper, RD, Herbel, CH 2004. Range management: principles and practices, 5th edition. Pearson Prentice Hall, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
Jarman, SN, Gales, NJ, Tierney, M, Gill, PC, Elliot, NG 2002. A DNA-based method for identification of krill species and its application to analysing the diet of marine vertebrate predators. Molecular Ecology 11, 2679–2690.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kojoma, M, Kurihara, K, Yamada, K, Sekita, S, Satake, M, Iida, O 2002. Genetic identification of cinnamon (Cinnamomum spp.) based on the trnL-trnF chloroplast DNA. Planta Medica 68, 94–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, GJ, MacGregor, CM 2004. Comparison of a microhistological analysis of faeces and alkane concentrations of faeces to estimate the botanical composition of the diet of grazing sheep. Proceedings of 25th biennial Conference of the Australian Society of Animal Production, Melbourne, 4–8 July 2004.Google Scholar
Mitchell, AA, Wilcox, DG, Laidlaw, E 1994. Arid shrubland plants of Western Australia, 2nd edition. University of Western Australia Press, Nedlands, Australia.Google Scholar
Morin, PA, Chambers, KE, Boesch, C, Vigilant, L 2001. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis of DNA from noninvasive samples of for accurate microsatellite genotyping of wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus). Molecular Ecology 10, 1835–1844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, MA, Waits, LP, Kendall, KC 2003. The influence of diet on faecal DNA amplification and sex identification in brown bears (Ursus arctos). Molecular Ecology 12, 2261–2265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newman, JA, Thompson, WA, Penning, PD, Mayes, RW 1995. Least-squares estimation of diet composition from n-alkanes in herbage and faeces using matrix mathematics. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 46, 793–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norbury, GL, Norbury, DC, Hacker, RB 1993. Impact of red kangaroos on the pasture layer in the Western Australian arid zone. Rangeland Journal 15, 12–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nsubuga, AM, Robbins, MM, Roeder, AD, Morin, PA, Boesch, C, Vigilant, L 2004. Factors affecting the amount of genomic DNA extrated from ape faeces and in the identifiction of an improved sample storage method. Molecular Ecology 13, 2089–2094.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pringle, HJR, van Vreeswyk, AM, Gilligan, SA 1994. An inventory and condition survey of rangelands in the North-Eastern Goldfields, Western Australia. Department of Agriculture Western Australia, technical bulletin 87.Google Scholar
Ridgway, KP, Duck, JM, Young, JPW 2003. Identification of roots from grass swards using PCR–RFLP and FFLP of the plastid trnL (UAA) intron. BioMed Central Ecology 3, 8.Google ScholarPubMed
Russell, P, Fletcher, W 2003. Relative palatability of selected perennial plants in the southern rangelands of Western Australia – results of a survey of rangeland practitioners. Range Management Newsletter, 03/3, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Saiki, RF, Scharf, S, Faloona, F, Mullis, KB, Horn, GT, Erlich, HA, Arnheim, N 1985. Enzymatic amplification of beta-globin genomic sequences and restriction enzyme site analysis for diagnosis of sickle cell anemia. Science 230, 1350–1354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Short, J 1986. The effect of pasture availability on food intake, species selection and grazing behaviour of kangaroos. Journal of Applied Ecology 23, 559–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, DG, Mayes, RW, Raats, JG 2001. Effect of species, plant part, and season of harvest on n-alkane concentrations in the cuticular wax of common rangeland grasses from southern Africa. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 52, 875–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southwell, C, Weaver, K, Osborn, D 1991. Report on the 1990 aerial survey of kangaroos in Western Australia. Wildlife Monitoring Unit, Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service, Australia.Google Scholar
Sprent, JA, McArthur, C 2002. Diet and diet selection of two species in the macropodid browser–grazer continuum: do they eat what they should? Australian Journal of Zoology 50, 183–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taberlet, P, Gielly, L, Pautou, G, Bouvet, J 1991. Universal primers for amplification of 3 non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Molecular Biology 17, 1105–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, RJ 1983. The diet of the eastern grey kangaroo and wallaroo in areas of improved and native pasture in the New England tablelands. Australian Wildlife Research 10, 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmins, JN 2003. Chloroplast evolution, genetic manipulation and biosafety. In Information systems for biotechnology news report, June edition. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA.Google Scholar
Valiente, OL, Delgado, P, de Vega, A, and Guada, JA 2003. Validation of the n-alkane technique to estimate intake, digestibility, and diet composition in sheep consuming mixed grain: roughage diets. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 54, 693–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wann, JM, Bell, DT 1997. Dietary preference of the black-gloved wallaby (Macropus irma) and the western grey kangaroo (M. fuliginosus) in Whiteman Park, Perth, Western Australia. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 80, 55–62.Google Scholar
Western Australia Conservation and Land Management 2008. Flora Base – the Western Australia flora. Retrieved January 4, 2008, from http://florabase.calm.wa.gov.au/Google Scholar
Zhao, Y, Yu, M, Miller, JW, Chen, M, Bremer, EG, Kabat, W, Yogev, R 2002. Quantification of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Proviral DNA by using TaqMan technology. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 40, 675–678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed