Genetic variability of the neogregarine apicystis bombi, an etiological agent of an emergent bumblebee disease

The worldwide spread of diseases is considered a major threat to biodiversity and a possible driver of the decline of pollinator populations, particularly when novel species or strains of parasites emerge. Previous studies have suggested that populations of introduced European honeybee (Apis mellifera) and bumblebee species (Bombus terrestris and Bombus ruderatus) in Argentina share the neogregarine parasite Apicystis bombi with the native bumblebee (Bombus dahlbomii). In this study we investigated whether A. bombi is acting as an emergent parasite in the non-native populations. Specifically, we asked whether A. bombi, recently identified in Argentina, was introduced by European, non-native bees. Using ITS1 and ITS2 to assess the parasite's intraspecific genetic variation in bees from Argentina and Europe, we found a largely unstructured parasite population, with only 15% of the genetic variation being explained by geographic location. The most abundant haplotype in Argentina (found in all 9 specimens of non-native species) was identical to the most abundant haplotype in Europe (found in 6 out of 8 specimens). Similarly, there was no evidence of structuring by host species, with this factor explaining only 17% of the genetic variation. Interestingly, parasites in native Bombus ephippiatus from Mexico were genetically distant from the Argentine and European samples, suggesting that sufficient variability does exist in the ITS region to identify continent-level genetic structure in the parasite. Thus, the data suggest that A. bombi from Argentina and Europe share a common, relatively recent origin. Although our data did not provide information on the direction of transfer, the absence of genetic structure across space and host species suggests that A. bombi may be acting as an emergent infectious disease across bee taxa and continents

DNA Methods to Identify Missing Persons

Human identification by DNA analysis in missing person cases typically involves comparison of two categories of sample: a reference sample, which could be obtained from intimate items of the person in question or from family members, and the questioned sample from the unknown person-usually derived from the bones, teeth, or soft tissues of human remains. Exceptions include the analysis of archived tissues, such as those held by hospital pathology departments, and the analysis of samples relating to missing, but living persons. DNA is extracted from the questioned and reference samples and well-characterized regions of the genetic code are amplified from each source using the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), which generates sufficient copies of the target region for visualization and comparison of the genetic sequences obtained from each sample. If the DNA sequences of the questioned and reference samples differ, this is normally sufficient for the questioned DNA to be excluded as having come from the same source. If the sequences are identical, statistical analysis is necessary to determine the probability that the match is a consequence of the questioned sequence coming from the same individual who provided the reference sample or from a randomly occurring individual in the general population. Match probabilities that are currently achievable are frequently greater than 1 in 1 billion, allowing identity to be assigned with considerable confidence in many cases

Critical issues in the historical and contemporary development of forensic anthropology in Australia: An international comparison

© 2017 Elsevier B.V. The aim of this brief critical qualitative analysis is to examine the development of forensic anthropology in Australia, at a time of significant change in the discipline. It will briefly summarise its historical establishment, making comparative reference to other regions—particularly the United Kingdom and United States, and the influence of the Bali Bombings of 2002, Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami of 2004 and Black Saturday Bushfires of 2009. The analysis goes on to consider key factors in research in forensic anthropology in the United States, and the development of standards and regulation in the US and UK. The significance of research in post-mortem diagenesis in Brazil—a country sharing aspects of climate, soil types and demography with Australia—is also considered, as well as the significance of patterns of casework encountered in Australia compared with those of other jurisdictions. While forensic anthropology as a discipline has grown remarkably in recent years, this analysis suggests that research and training tailored to the specific pattern of casework encountered in Australia is now essential to support the development of national standards in science, education, and professional regulation. The significance of the establishment of the first taphonomy research facility outside of the US—the Australian Facility for Taphonomic Experimental Research—is briefly considered with reference to what this facility may offer to the development of forensic anthropology in Australia