<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>L.P. Waits</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>K.C. Kendall</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>David A. Roon</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2003</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;Hair samples are an increasingly important DNA source for wildlife studies, yet optimal storage methods and DNA degradation rates have not been rigorously evaluated. We tested amplification success rates over a one-year storage period for DNA extracted from brown bear (Ursus arctos) hair samples preserved using silica desiccation and -20C freezing. For three nuclear DNA microsatellites, success rates decreased significantly after a six-month time point, regardless of storage method. For a 1000 bp mitochondrial fragment, a similar decrease occurred after a two-week time point. Minimizing delays between collection and DNA extraction will maximize success rates for hair-based noninvasive genetic sampling projects.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1046/j.1471-8286.2003.00358.x</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Wiley</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>A quantitative evaluation of two methods for preserving hair samples</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>