Many wildlife studies use noninvasive survey methods such as barbed wire to obtain hair samples for DNA analysis. If laboratory costs preclude processing all samples, it may be important to know a priori which samples are most likely to yield useful DNA. It may also be helpful to know whether apparently poor‐quality samples will yield useable DNA, and so be worth the time and cost of processing. To help resolve this issue, we initiated a field classification system for hair from brown bears (Ursus arctos) obtained using unbaited wires deployed across 6 streams in western Alaska, USA, where bears travel and feed on adult Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). Averaged over 4 years (2014–2017), amplification success ranged from 89% for samples categorized in the field as being of highest quality, based on volume of hairs, to 37% for single or double strands of hair. Moreover, DNA analysis of poor‐quality samples markedly increased the numbers of individual bears detected, and those detected multiple times—important data for genetic capture–mark–recapture abundance estimates. Thus, field classification can help cut costs and streamline laboratory analyses when hair samples are abundant. Yet, even apparently poor‐quality samples are likely worth processing if they are the only ones representing a site, date, or other sampling stratum, hair capture devices are checked infrequently, or laboratory costs are not limiting. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.

中文翻译：

---

非侵入式遗传分析的棕熊毛选择优化

许多野生动植物研究都使用诸如铁丝网之类的非侵入式调查方法来获取用于DNA分析的头发样本。如果实验室成本无法处理所有样品，则先验了解哪些样品最有可能产生有用的DNA可能很重要。了解表面质量较差的样品是否会产生可用的DNA可能也很有帮助，因此值得花费时间和成本进行处理。为帮助解决此问题，我们启动了野外分类系统，该系统使用美国上阿拉斯加西部6条溪流中部署的无诱饵线从棕熊（Ursus arctos）获得的毛发，熊在该处旅行并以成年太平洋鲑鱼（Oncorhynchus nerka）为食）。平均四年（2014-2017年），扩增成功率范围从在野外被归类为最高质量的样本（基于头发的体积）的89％到单发或双发的37％。此外，对劣质样品的DNA分析显着增加了检测到的单个熊的数量，而且多次检测到的数量也增加了-这是遗传捕获－标记－捕获量估计的重要数据。因此，当头发样品丰富时，现场分类可以帮助削减成本并简化实验室分析。然而，即使是质量很差的样品，如果它们只是代表地点，日期或其他采样层的唯一样品，不经常检查毛发捕获设备，或者实验室成本没有限制，则可能值得处理。©2020野生动物协会。