When can noninvasive samples provide sufficient information in conservation genetics studies?

Noninvasive sampling, of faeces and hair for example, has enabled many genetic studies of wildlife populations. However, two prevailing problems common to these studies are small sample sizes and high genotyping errors. The first problem stems from the difficulty in collecting noninvasive samples, particularly from populations of rare or elusive species, and the second is caused by the low quantity and quality of DNA extracted from a noninvasive sample. A common question is therefore whether noninvasive sampling provides sufficient information for the analyses commonly conducted in conservation genetics studies. Here, we conducted a simulation study to investigate the effect of small sample sizes and genotyping errors on the precision and accuracy of the most commonly estimated genetic parameters. Our results indicate that small sample sizes cause little bias in measures of expected heterozygosity, pairwise F_ST and population structure, but a large downward bias in estimates of allelic diversity. Allelic dropouts and false alleles had a much smaller effect than missing data, which effectively reduces sample size further. Overall, reasonable estimates of genetic variation and population subdivision are obtainable from noninvasive samples as long as error rates are kept below a frequency of 0.2. Similarly, unbiased estimates of population clustering can be made with genotyping error rates below 0.5 when the populations are highly differentiated. These results provide a useful guide for researchers faced with studying the conservation genetics of small, endangered populations from noninvasive samples.     

Assessment of genotyping accuracy in a non-invasive DNA-based population survey of Asiatic black bears (Ursus thibetanus): lessons from a large-scale pilot study in Iwate prefecture,northern Japan

Non-invasive DNA genotyping using hair samples has become a common method in population surveys of Asiatic black bears (Ursus thibetanus) in Japan; however, the accuracy of the genotyping data has rarely been discussed in empirical studies. Therefore, we conducted a large-scale pilot study to examine genotyping accuracy and sought an efficient way of error-checking hair-trapping data. We collected 2,067 hair samples, successfully determined the genotypes of 1,245 samples, and identified 295 individuals. The genotyping data were further divided into 3 subsets of data according to the number of hairs used for DNA extraction in each sample (1–4, 5–9, and ≥10 hairs), and the error rates of allelic dropout and false alleles were estimated for each subset using a maximum likelihood method. The genotyping error rates in the samples with ≥10 hairs were found to be lower than those in the samples with 1–4 and 5–9 hairs. The presence of erroneous genotypes among the identified individuals was further checked using a post hoc goodness-of-fit test that determined the match between the expected and observed frequencies of individual homozygotes at 0–6 loci. The results indicated the presence of erroneous genotypes, possibly as a result of allelic dropout, in the samples. Therefore, for improved accuracy, it is recommended that samples containing ≥10 hairs should be used for genotyping and a post hoc goodness-of-fit test should be performed to exclude erroneous genotypes before proceeding with downstream analysis such as capture-mark-recapture estimation.     

How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetics studies

Genotyping errors occur when the genotype determined after molecular analysis does not correspond to the real genotype of the individual under consideration. Virtually every genetic data set includes some erroneous genotypes, but genotyping errors remain a taboo subject in population genetics, even though they might greatly bias the final conclusions, especially for studies based on individual identification. Here, we consider four case studies representing a large variety of population genetics investigations differing in their sampling strategies (noninvasive or traditional), in the type of organism studied (plant or animal) and the molecular markers used [microsatellites or amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs)]. In these data sets, the estimated genotyping error rate ranges from 0.8% for microsatellite loci from bear tissues to 2.6% for AFLP loci from dwarf birch leaves. Main sources of errors were allelic dropouts for microsatellites and differences in peak intensities for AFLPs, but in both cases human factors were non-negligible error generators. Therefore, tracking genotyping errors and identifying their causes are necessary to clean up the data sets and validate the final results according to the precision required. In addition, we propose the outline of a protocol designed to limit and quantify genotyping errors at each step of the genotyping process. In particular, we recommend (i) several efficient precautions to prevent contaminations and technical artefacts; (ii) systematic use of blind samples and automation; (iii) experience and rigor for laboratory work and scoring; and (iv) systematic reporting of the error rate in population genetics studies.     

Maximum-likelihood estimation of allelic dropout and false allele error rates from microsatellite genotypes in the absence of reference data

The importance of quantifying and accounting for stochastic genotyping errors when analyzing microsatellite data is increasingly being recognized. This awareness is motivating the development of data analysis methods that not only take errors into consideration but also recognize the difference between two distinct classes of error, allelic dropout and false alleles. Currently methods to estimate rates of allelic dropout and false alleles depend upon the availability of error-free reference genotypes or reliable pedigree data, which are often not available. We have developed a maximum-likelihood-based method for estimating these error rates from a single replication of a sample of genotypes. Simulations show it to be both accurate and robust to modest violations of its underlying assumptions. We have applied the method to estimating error rates in two microsatellite data sets. It is implemented in a computer program, Pedant, which estimates allelic dropout and false allele error rates with 95% confidence regions from microsatellite genotype data and performs power analysis. Pedant is freely available at http://www.stats.gla.ac.uk/ approximately paulj/pedant.html.     

Effects of genotyping errors on parentage exclusion analysis

Genetic markers are widely used to determine the parentage of individuals in studies of mating systems, reproductive success, dispersals, quantitative genetic parameters and in the management of conservation populations. These markers are, however, imperfect for parentage analyses because of the presence of genotyping errors and undetectable alleles, which may cause incompatible genotypes (mismatches) between parents and offspring and thus result in false exclusions of true parentage. Highly polymorphic markers widely used in parentage analyses, such as microsatellites, are especially prone to genotyping errors. In this investigation, I derived the probabilities of excluding a random (related) individual from parentage and the probabilities of Mendelian-inconsistent errors (mismatches) and Mendelian-consistent errors (which do not cause mismatches) in parent-offspring dyads, when a marker having null alleles, allelic dropouts and false alleles is used in a parentage analysis. These probabilities are useful in evaluating the impact of various types of genotyping errors on the information content of a set of markers in and thus the power of a parentage analysis, in determining the threshold number of genetic mismatches that is appropriate for a parentage exclusion analysis and in estimating the rates of genotyping errors and frequencies of null alleles from observed mismatches between known parent-offspring dyads. These applications are demonstrated by numerical examples using both hypothetical and empirical data sets and discussed in the context of practical parentage exclusion analyses.     

Allelic dropout from a high-quality DNA source

Allelic dropouts are an important source of genotyping error, particularly in studies using non-invasive sampling techniques. This has important implications for conservation biology, as an increasing number of studies are now using non-invasive techniques to study rare species or endangered populations. Previously, allelic dropout has typically been associated with PCR amplification of low quality/quantity template DNA. However, in this study we recorded high levels of allelic dropout (21–57%) at specific loci amplified from a high quality DNA (63.1 ± 7.8 ng/μl) source in the red fox (Vulpes vulpes). We designed a series of experiments to identify the sources of error. Whilst we were able to show that the best method to identify allelic dropout was the dilution of template DNA prior to PCR amplification, our data also showed two specific patterns: (1) allelic dropouts occurred at specific loci; (2) allelic dropouts occurred at specific pair-wise combinations of alleles. These patterns suggest that mechanisms other than low quantity template DNA are responsible for allelic dropout. Further research on the causes of these patterns in this and other studies would further our understanding of genotyping errors and would aid future studies where allelic dropout may be a serious issue.     

Importance of a pilot study for non-invasive genetic sampling: genotyping errors and population size estimation in red deer

Population size information is critical for managing endangered or harvested populations. Population size can now be estimated from non-invasive genetic sampling. However, pitfalls remain such as genotyping errors (allele dropout and false alleles at microsatellite loci). To evaluate the feasibility of non-invasive sampling (e.g., for population size estimation), a pilot study is required. Here, we present a pilot study consisting of (i) a genetic step to test loci amplification and to estimate allele frequencies and genotyping error rates when using faecal DNA, and (ii) a simulation step to quantify and minimise the effects of errors on estimates of population size. The pilot study was conducted on a population of red deer in a fenced natural area of 5440 ha, in France. Twelve microsatellite loci were tested for amplification and genotyping errors. The genotyping error rates for microsatellite loci were 0–0.83 (mean=0.2) for allele dropout rates and 0–0.14 (mean=0.02) for false allele rates, comparable to rates encountered in other non-invasive studies. Simulation results suggest we must conduct 6 PCR amplifications per sample (per locus) to achieve approximately 97% correct genotypes. The 3% error rate appears to have little influence on the accuracy and precision of population size estimation. This paper illustrates the importance of conducting a pilot study (including genotyping and simulations) when using non-invasive sampling to study threatened or managed populations.     

Microsatellite standardization and evaluation of genotyping error in a large multi-partner research programme for conservation of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)

Microsatellite genotyping is a common DNA characterization technique in population, ecological and evolutionary genetics research. Since different alleles are sized relative to internal size-standards, different laboratories must calibrate and standardize allelic designations when exchanging data. This interchange of microsatellite data can often prove problematic. Here, 16 microsatellite loci were calibrated and standardized for the Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, across 12 laboratories. Although inconsistencies were observed, particularly due to differences between migration of DNA fragments and actual allelic size ('size shifts'), inter-laboratory calibration was successful. Standardization also allowed an assessment of the degree and partitioning of genotyping error. Notably, the global allelic error rate was reduced from 0.05 ± 0.01 prior to calibration to 0.01 ± 0.002 post-calibration. Most errors were found to occur during analysis (i.e. when size-calling alleles; the mean proportion of all errors that were analytical errors across loci was 0.58 after calibration). No evidence was found of an association between the degree of error and allelic size range of a locus, number of alleles, nor repeat type, nor was there evidence that genotyping errors were more prevalent when a laboratory analyzed samples outside of the usual geographic area they encounter. The microsatellite calibration between laboratories presented here will be especially important for genetic assignment of marine-caught Atlantic salmon, enabling analysis of marine mortality, a major factor in the observed declines of this highly valued species.     

A Maximum-Likelihood Method to Correct for Allelic Dropout in Microsatellite Data with No Replicate Genotypes

Allelic dropout is a commonly observed source of missing data in microsatellite genotypes, in which one or both allelic copies at a locus fail to be amplified by the polymerase chain reaction. Especially for samples with poor DNA quality, this problem causes a downward bias in estimates of observed heterozygosity and an upward bias in estimates of inbreeding, owing to mistaken classifications of heterozygotes as homozygotes when one of the two copies drops out. One general approach for avoiding allelic dropout involves repeated genotyping of homozygous loci to minimize the effects of experimental error. Existing computational alternatives often require replicate genotyping as well. These approaches, however, are costly and are suitable only when enough DNA is available for repeated genotyping. In this study, we propose a maximum-likelihood approach together with an expectation-maximization algorithm to jointly estimate allelic dropout rates and allele frequencies when only one set of nonreplicated genotypes is available. Our method considers estimates of allelic dropout caused by both sample-specific factors and locus-specific factors, and it allows for deviation from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium owing to inbreeding. Using the estimated parameters, we correct the bias in the estimation of observed heterozygosity through the use of multiple imputations of alleles in cases where dropout might have occurred. With simulated data, we show that our method can (1) effectively reproduce patterns of missing data and heterozygosity observed in real data; (2) correctly estimate model parameters, including sample-specific dropout rates, locus-specific dropout rates, and the inbreeding coefficient; and (3) successfully correct the downward bias in estimating the observed heterozygosity. We find that our method is fairly robust to violations of model assumptions caused by population structure and by genotyping errors from sources other than allelic dropout. Because the data sets imputed under our model can be investigated in additional subsequent analyses, our method will be useful for preparing data for applications in diverse contexts in population genetics and molecular ecology.     

Estimation of genotyping error rate from repeat genotyping,unintentional recaptures and known parent–offspring comparisons in 16 microsatellite loci for brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus)

Genotyping errors are present in almost all genetic data and can affect biological conclusions of a study, particularly for studies based on individual identification and parentage. Many statistical approaches can incorporate genotyping errors, but usually need accurate estimates of error rates. Here, we used a new microsatellite data set developed for brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus) to estimate genotyping error using three approaches: (i) repeat genotyping 5% of samples, (ii) comparing unintentionally recaptured individuals and (iii) Mendelian inheritance error checking for known parent–offspring pairs. In each data set, we quantified genotyping error rate per allele due to allele drop‐out and false alleles. Genotyping error rate per locus revealed an average overall genotyping error rate by direct count of 0.3%, 1.5% and 1.7% (0.002, 0.007 and 0.008 per allele error rate) from replicate genotypes, known parent–offspring pairs and unintentionally recaptured individuals, respectively. By direct‐count error estimates, the recapture and known parent–offspring data sets revealed an error rate four times greater than estimated using repeat genotypes. There was no evidence of correlation between error rates and locus variability for all three data sets, and errors appeared to occur randomly over loci in the repeat genotypes, but not in recaptures and parent–offspring comparisons. Furthermore, there was no correlation in locus‐specific error rates between any two of the three data sets. Our data suggest that repeat genotyping may underestimate true error rates and may not estimate locus‐specific error rates accurately. We therefore suggest using methods for error estimation that correspond to the overall aim of the study (e.g. known parent–offspring comparisons in parentage studies).     

Noninvasive genotyping and Mendelian analysis of microsatellites in African savannah elephants

We obtained fresh dung samples from 202 (133 mother-offspring pairs) savannah elephants (Loxodonta africana) in Samburu, Kenya, and genotyped them at 20 microsatellite loci to assess genotyping success and errors. A total of 98.6% consensus genotypes was successfully obtained, with allelic dropout and false allele rates at 1.6% (n = 46) and 0.9% (n = 37) of heterozygous and total consensus genotypes, respectively, and an overall genotyping error rate of 2.5% based on repeat typing. Mendelian analysis revealed consistent inheritance in all but 38 allelic pairs from mother-offspring, giving an average mismatch error rate of 2.06%, a possible result of null alleles, mutations, genotyping errors, or inaccuracy in maternity assignment. We detected no evidence for large allele dropout, stuttering, or scoring error in the dataset and significant Hardy-Weinberg deviations at only two loci due to heterozygosity deficiency. Across loci, null allele frequencies were low (range: 0.000-0.042) and below the 0.20 threshold that would significantly bias individual-based studies. The high genotyping success and low errors observed in this study demonstrate reliability of the method employed and underscore the application of simple pedigrees in noninvasive studies. Since none of the sires were included in this study, the error rates presented are just estimates.     

Assessing allelic dropout and genotype reliability using maximum likelihood.

A growing number of population genetic studies utilize nuclear DNA microsatellite data from museum specimens and noninvasive sources. Genotyping errors are elevated in these low quantity DNA sources, potentially compromising the power and accuracy of the data. The most conservative method for addressing this problem is effective, but requires extensive replication of individual genotypes. In search of a more efficient method, we developed a maximum-likelihood approach that minimizes errors by estimating genotype reliability and strategically directing replication at loci most likely to harbor errors. The model assumes that false and contaminant alleles can be removed from the dataset and that the allelic dropout rate is even across loci. Simulations demonstrate that the proposed method marks a vast improvement in efficiency while maintaining accuracy. When allelic dropout rates are low (0-30%), the reduction in the number of PCR replicates is typically 40-50%. The model is robust to moderate violations of the even dropout rate assumption. For datasets that contain false and contaminant alleles, a replication strategy is proposed. Our current model addresses only allelic dropout, the most prevalent source of genotyping error. However, the developed likelihood framework can incorporate additional error-generating processes as they become more clearly understood.     

A simple and robust TDT-type test against genotyping error with error rates varying across families

The transmission/disequilibrium test (TDT), a family based test of linkage and association, is a popular test for studies of complex inheritance, as it is nonparametric and robust against spurious conclusions induced by hidden genetic structure, such as stratification or admixture. However, the TDT may be biased by genotyping errors. Undetected genotyping errors may be contributing to an inflated type I error rate among reported TDT-derived associations. To adjust for bias, a popular approach is to assume a genotype error model for describing the pattern of errors and propose association tests using likelihood method. However, all model-based approaches tend to perform unsatisfactorily if the related genotyping error rates are not identical across all families. In this paper, we propose a TDT-type association test which is not only simple, robust against population stratification (and hence the assumption of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium is not required), but also robust against genotyping error with error rates varying across families. Simulation studies confirm that the new test has very reasonable performance.     

Two-step multiplex polymerase chain reaction improves the speed and accuracy of genotyping using DNA from noninvasive and museum samples

Many studies in molecular ecology rely upon the genotyping of large numbers of low‐quantity DNA extracts derived from noninvasive or museum specimens. To overcome low amplification success rates and avoid genotyping errors such as allelic dropout and false alleles, multiple polymerase chain reaction (PCR) replicates for each sample are typically used. Recently, two‐step multiplex procedures have been introduced which drastically increase the success rate and efficiency of genotyping. However, controversy still exists concerning the amount of replication needed for suitable control of error. Here we describe the use of a two‐step multiplex PCR procedure that allows rapid genotyping using at least 19 different microsatellite loci. We applied this approach to quantified amounts of noninvasive DNAs from western chimpanzee, western gorilla, mountain gorilla and black and white colobus faecal samples, as well as to DNA from ~100‐year‐old gorilla teeth from museums. Analysis of over 45 000 PCRs revealed average success rates of > 90% using faecal DNAs and 74% using museum specimen DNAs. Average allelic dropout rates were substantially reduced compared to those obtained using conventional singleplex PCR protocols, and reliable genotyping using low (< 25 pg) amounts of template DNA was possible. However, four to five replicates of apparently homozygous results are needed to avoid allelic dropout when using the lowest concentration DNAs (< 50 pg/reaction), suggesting that use of protocols allowing routine acceptance of homozygous genotypes after as few as three replicates may lead to unanticipated errors when applied to low‐concentration DNAs.     

Solutions for PCR,cloning and sequencing errors in population genetic analysis

PCR and sequencing artefacts can seriously bias population genetic analyses, particularly of populations with low genetic variation such as endangered vertebrate populations. Here, we estimate the error rates, discuss their population genetics implications, and propose a simple detection method that helps to reduce the risk of accepting such errors. We study the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class IIB of guppies, Poecilia reticulata and find that PCR base misincorporations inflate the apparent sequence diversity. When analysing neutral genes, such bias can inflate estimates of effective population size. Previously suggested protocols for identifying genuine alleles are unlikely to exclude all sequencing errors, or they ignore genuine sequence diversity. We present a novel and statistically robust method that reduces the likelihood of accepting PCR artefacts as genuine alleles, and which minimises the necessity of repeated genotyping. Our method identifies sequences that are unlikely to be a PCR artefact, and which need to be independently confirmed through additional PCR of the same template DNA. The proposed methods are recommended particularly for population genetic studies that involve multi-template DNA and in studies on genes with low genetic diversity.     

Pros and cons of external swabbing of amphibians for genetic analyses

Non-invasive DNA sampling is an important tool in amphibian conservation. Buccal swabs are nowadays replacing the wounding toe-clipping method. Skin and cloaca swabbing are even less invasive and easier to handle than buccal swabbing, but could result in contaminations of genetic material. Therefore, we test if external skin and cloaca swabs are as reliable as buccal swabs for genetic analysis of amphibians. We analysed eight microsatellite loci for the common frog (Rana temporaria, Linnaeus 1758) and compared genotyping results for buccal, skin and cloaca swabs regarding allelic dropouts and false alleles. Furthermore, we compared two DNA extraction methods regarding efficiency and cost. DNA quality and quantity (amplification success, genotyping error rate, in nanogram per microlitre) were comparable among DNA sources and extraction methods. However, skin and cloaca samples exhibited high degrees of contamination with foreign individuals, which was due to sample collection during mating season. Here, we established a simple low budget procedure to receive DNA of amphibians avoiding stressful buccal swabbing or harmful toe clipping. However, the possibility of contaminations of external swabs has to be considered.     

Cross-amplification of ungulate microsatellite markers in the endemic Indian antelope or blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) for population monitoring and conservation genetics studies in south Asia

The Indian antelope or blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) is endemic to the Indian subcontinent, inhabiting scrublands and dry grasslands. Most of the blackbuck populations are small, isolated, and threatened by habitat fragmentation and degradation. Management of such disjunct populations requires genetic characterization, which is critical for assessing hazards of stochastic events and inbreeding. Addressing the scarcity of such information on the blackbuck, we describe a novel panel of microsatellite markers that could be used to monitor blackbuck demography and population genetic parameters using non-invasive faecal sampling. We screened microsatellites (n?=?40) that had been reported to amplify in bovid and cervid species using faecal samples of the blackbuck collected from Kaimoor Wildlife Sanctuary, Uttar Pradesh, India and its vicinities. We selected 12 markers for amplification using faecal DNA extracts (n?=?140) in three multiplex reactions. We observed a mean amplification success rate of 72.4% across loci (92.1–25.7%) with high allele diversity (mean number of alleles/locus?=?8.67?±?1.03). Mean genotyping error rates across the markers were low to moderate (allelic drop-out rate?=?0.09; false allele rate?=?0.11). The proportions of first- and second-order relatives in the study population were 0.69% and 6.21%, respectively. Based on amplification success, genotyping error rates and the probability of identity (P_ID), we suggest (i) a panel of five microsatellite markers (cumulative P_ID?=?1.24?×?10^–5) for individual identification and population monitoring and (ii) seven additional markers for conservation genetics studies. This study provides essential tools capable of augmenting blackbuck conservation strategies at the landscape level, integral to protecting the scrubland-grassland ecosystem.

     

Susceptibility of biallelic haplotype and genotype frequencies to genotyping error

With the availability of fast genotyping methods and genomic databases, the search for statistical association of single nucleotide polymorphisms with a complex trait has become an important methodology in medical genetics. However, even fairly rare errors occurring during the genotyping process can lead to spurious association results and decrease in statistical power. We develop a systematic approach to study how genotyping errors change the genotype distribution in a sample. The general M-marker case is reduced to that of a single-marker locus by recognizing the underlying tensor-product structure of the error matrix. Both method and general conclusions apply to the general error model; we give detailed results for allele-based errors of size depending both on the marker locus and the allele present. Multiple errors are treated in terms of the associated diffusion process on the space of genotype distributions. We find that certain genotype and haplotype distributions remain unchanged under genotyping errors, and that genotyping errors generally render the distribution more similar to the stable one. In case-control association studies, this will lead to loss of statistical power for nondifferential genotyping errors and increase in type I error for differential genotyping errors. Moreover, we show that allele-based genotyping errors do not disturb Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium in the genotype distribution. In this setting we also identify maximally affected distributions. As they correspond to situations with rare alleles and marker loci in high linkage disequilibrium, careful checking for genotyping errors is advisable when significant association based on such alleles/haplotypes is observed in association studies.     

Comparison of F(ST) outlier tests for SNP loci under selection

Genome scans with many genetic markers provide the opportunity to investigate local adaptation in natural populations and identify candidate genes under selection. In particular, SNPs are dense throughout the genome of most organisms and are commonly observed in functional genes making them ideal markers to study adaptive molecular variation. This approach has become commonly employed in ecological and population genetics studies to detect outlier loci that are putatively under selection. However, there are several challenges to address with outlier approaches including genotyping errors, underlying population structure and false positives, variation in mutation rate and limited sensitivity (false negatives). In this study, we evaluated multiple outlier tests and their type I (false positive) and type II (false negative) error rates in a series of simulated data sets. Comparisons included simulation procedures (FDIST2, ARLEQUIN v.3.5 and BAYESCAN) as well as more conventional tools such as global F(ST) histograms. Of the three simulation methods, FDIST2 and BAYESCAN typically had the lowest type II error, BAYESCAN had the least type I error and Arlequin had highest type I and II error. High error rates in Arlequin with a hierarchical approach were partially because of confounding scenarios where patterns of adaptive variation were contrary to neutral structure; however, Arlequin consistently had highest type I and type II error in all four simulation scenarios tested in this study. Given the results provided here, it is important that outlier loci are interpreted cautiously and error rates of various methods are taken into consideration in studies of adaptive molecular variation, especially when hierarchical structure is included.     

Population size estimation in Yellowstone wolves with error-prone noninvasive microsatellite genotypes

Determining population sizes can be difficult, but is essential for conservation. By counting distinct microsatellite genotypes, DNA from noninvasive samples (hair, faeces) allows estimation of population size. Problems arise because genotypes from noninvasive samples are error-prone, but genotyping errors can be reduced by multiple polymerase chain reaction (PCR). For faecal genotypes from wolves in Yellowstone National Park, error rates varied substantially among samples, often above the 'worst-case threshold' suggested by simulation. Consequently, a substantial proportion of multilocus genotypes held one or more errors, despite multiple PCR. These genotyping errors created several genotypes per individual and caused overestimation (up to 5.5-fold) of population size. We propose a 'matching approach' to eliminate this overestimation bias.