Table 2. Overview of massively parallel DNA sequencing methods applied to insect museum specimens.
| Publication | Taxon group | Samples analyzed | Sequencing approach and platform | Output |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Staats et al. (2013) | Flies and beetles |
Number: three specimens; Age: 1992–1995; Tissue: one to three legs, thorax, whole specimen (destructive protocol) |
Shotgun whole genome skimming; Illumina HiSeq™ 2000 |
Read depth: 3.5×–146.1× (mt genome); % Mapping: 0.002–0.82 (mt genome); Contamination: one specimen extensive bacteriophage & fungal DNA |
| Tin, Economo & Mikheyev (2014) | Flies and ants |
Number: 11 specimens; Age: 1910–1976; Tissue: whole specimen (non-destructive protocol) |
Shotgun whole genome skimming; RAD-tag; Illumina MiSeq™ & HiSeq™ 2500 |
Read depth: 0.08×–1.0× (whole genome); % Mapping: 19–76 (whole genome); Contamination: not reported |
| Heintzman et al. (2014) | Beetles |
Number: four specimens; Age: Late Pleistocene (C14), 1875–1950 (museum); Tissue: one hind leg, pronotum, elytron (destructive protocol) |
Shotgun whole genome skimming; Illumina HiSeq™ 2000 |
Reads aligned to reference: 0.009%–0.225× (mt genome & five nuclear loci); % Insect contigs: 0.25–46.5; Contamination: up to ca. 20% mammalian sequences in contigs |
| Maddison & Cooper (2014) | Beetles |
Number: one specimen; Age: 1968; Tissue: whole specimen (non-destructive protocol) |
Shotgun whole genome skimming; Illumina HiSeq™ 2000 |
Read depth: not reported (eight gene targets); % Gene length coverage: 95–100 (eight gene targets); Contamination: not reported |
| Kanda et al. (2015) | Beetles |
Number: 13 specimens; Age: 1929–2010; Tissue: whole specimen (non-destructive protocol) |
Shotgun whole genome skimming; Illumina HiSeq™ 2000 (two lanes) |
Read depth: 0.44×–4.64× (67 gene targets); N50: 280–700 (67 gene targets); Contamination: possible in some specimens but not quantified |
| Timmermans et al. (2016) | Butterflies |
Number: 35 specimens; Age: 1980–2005; Tissue: one leg (destructive protocol) |
Shotgun whole genome skimming; Illumina MiSeq™ (1/3 flow cell) |
% Coverage: 0–100 (mt coding loci); Contamination: not reported; Failure rate: four out of 35 specimens any reads matching mt genomes |
| Suchan et al. (2016) | Butterflies and grasshoppers |
Number: 60 specimens; Age: 1908–1997; Tissue: legs (destructive protocol) |
Target capture of RAD probes; Illumina MiSeq™ & HiSeq™ (one lane each) |
Median depth: 10× (for each SNP); % Matrix fullness: 52–72.5 (RAD loci); Contamination: ca. 9% of contigs were of exogenous origin |
| Blaimer et al. (2016) | Carpenter bees |
Number: 51 specimens; Age: 1894–2013; Tissue: one leg (destructive protocol) |
Target capture of Hymenopteran UCEs; Illumina MiSeq™ |
Average coverage: 7.4×–182.4× (UCE loci); Recovered loci: 6–972 (UCE per sample); Contamination: not reported |
| Pitteloud et al. (2017) | Butterflies |
Number: 32 specimens; Age: 1929–2012; Tissue: legs (destructive protocol) |
PCR Multiplex & Shotgun sequencing; Illumina MiSeq™ |
Length sequences (bp): 109–7,297 (mt and rDNA loci); Contamination: not reported |
Note:
This is a selection of studies covering a variety of taxonomic groups, sampling strategies and sequencing approaches.