# D auratus genetics and phenotype



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Another indication that attempting to assign frogs to a population via visual methods is problematic at best.... 


*Abstract: *The green and black poison-dart frog _Dendrobates auratus _exhibits high intraspecific variation in hue color and pattern throughout its range, making it a very popular species in the pet trade. We analyzed the correspondence between color variation and molecular variation of _D. auratus _from Costa Rica using RAPD analysis. Twenty-six random primers were analyzed for variation in 99 individuals from seven populations. Color pattern was scored from digital images of the dorsal and ventral views. In general, frogs from the Caribbean coast had significantly more light coloration than black color but cannot be grouped by population based only on hue pattern. Only 3 RAPD primers were found to be polymorphic, representing a total of 16 loci. Most of the molecular variation encountered here occurs within populations, thus making unclear the degree of population structure and differentiation. Further examination of COI mtDNA sequences from our samples also supports these results. Partial Mantel correlations suggested that the pattern of molecular variation is not congruent with the variation in color pattern in this species, an outcome that is discussed in terms of phenotypic evolution. Rev. Biol. Trop. 57 (Suppl. 1): 313-321. Epub 2009 November 30.


The pdf can be accessed here http://www.scielo.sa.cr/pdf/rbt/v57s1/art28v57s1.pdf 

non-pdf can be accessed here Revista de BiologÃ*a Tropical - Phenotypic and molecular variation in the green and black poison-dart frog Dendrobates auratus (Anura: Dendrobatidae) from Costa Rica 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## tachikoma (Apr 16, 2009)

Any summary for the layman? I read the entire thing, and not entirely sure I understood what was being said. I think it was saying morphs may or may not be actual morphs and out of the large sample taken 3 markers showed variation which represented 16 locai?


----------



## SDRiding (Jul 31, 2012)

tachikoma said:


> Any summary for the layman? I read the entire thing, and not entirely sure I understood what was being said. I think it was saying morphs may or may not be actual morphs and out of the large sample taken 3 markers showed variation which represented 16 locai?


Here's what I took from it. There are 99 cranky frogs hopping around! All of the frogs studied were "green and black", but even using sophisticated methodology they were unable to trace a particular frog to its specific population using its markings. Even using RAPD DNA testing they couldn't identify the specific population for a frog. Seems to reinforce the need to record and track the locale information for the hobbyist. Plenty of other interesting tidbits in there as well. Thanks for sharing Ed.


----------



## dneafse (Nov 1, 2006)

I like the spirit of this study, but given the limited number of polymorphic markers the authors used I'm not sure how much weight the negative result carries. I work on the population genomics of malaria parasites and anopheles mosquito vectors, and these kinds of negative pop structure results can go away as the analysis resolution increases. 

For example, with a 3,000 SNP genotyping microarray, Plasmodium parasites from West vs. East Africa are indistinguishable. With whole genome sequencing data, and analysis of the resulting set of >100,000 SNPs, there is a highly statistically significant differentiation between those two populations.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

dneafse said:


> I like the spirit of this study, but given the limited number of polymorphic markers the authors used I'm not sure how much weight the negative result carries. I work on the population genomics of malaria parasites and anopheles mosquito vectors, and these kinds of negative pop structure results can go away as the analysis resolution increases.
> 
> For example, with a 3,000 SNP genotyping microarray, Plasmodium parasites from West vs. East Africa are indistinguishable. With whole genome sequencing data, and analysis of the resulting set of >100,000 SNPs, there is a highly statistically significant differentiation between those two populations.


 
The main thing I was hoping people would take away is with the current data base attempting to identify a specimen to a specific population via visual cues within the range of that study is pretty pointless... In addition, the documentation that there may have been artificially augmented range extensions of auratus throws assignment via visual cues into further question as we don't know if there has been artificial supplementation of existent populations or not in regions where nature observation tourist trade occurs... 

Some comments 

Ed


----------

