Low-Input & Non-Invasive Samples for RAD-seq: Feathers, Fin Clips, Feces, and Museum Specimens

Researchers often collect feathers, fin clips, feces, and museum specimens to study wildlife genetics without harming individuals. Using RAD-seq with these samples presents several challenges:

• Low DNA quantity and poor quality can reduce library concentration.
• Non-target DNA fragments may dominate libraries.
• Allelic dropout can lead to biased genetic diversity estimates.
• DNA degradation increases PCR duplicates.

These sample types remain vital for conservation, forensics, and historical genomics. For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures or clinical decision-making.

Key Takeaways

• RAD-seq is ideal for low-input samples like feathers and feces, offering a cost-effective way to gather genetic data without harming wildlife.
• Proper sample collection and storage are crucial. Use clean tools, avoid moisture, and store samples in cool, dry conditions to maximize DNA yield.
• Specialized extraction methods can help overcome challenges with degraded DNA. Techniques like hyRAD and RAD-capture enhance data recovery from archival samples.
• Implementing quality control measures, such as contamination screening and duplicate management, ensures reliable genetic data from low-input samples.
• Plan a pilot study to test extraction and library strategies before scaling up.

At CD Genomics, we routinely work with low-input and non-invasive samples and have optimized RAD-seq workflows to maximize data recovery while controlling costs.

Figure 1. Overview of low-input RAD-seq from non-invasive samples to SNP data.

Why Choose RAD-seq for Low-Input Samples

RAD-seq vs Microsatellites and WGS

RAD-seq offers a practical solution for researchers working with low-quantity or degraded DNA. Microsatellite analysis often requires high-quality DNA and can struggle with non-invasive samples. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) provides comprehensive data but demands large amounts of DNA and incurs high costs. RAD-seq stands out for its flexibility and cost-effectiveness. Researchers can generate thousands of genetic markers from small or degraded samples, making it suitable for studies involving feathers, fin clips, or museum specimens.

Tip: RAD-seq protocols can be adapted for low-input DNA, allowing scientists to maximize data recovery from challenging samples.

The method also reduces sequencing costs by targeting specific regions of the genome. This approach increases throughput and enables population-level studies, even when sample quality varies. Although genotyping error rates can be higher with non-invasive samples, RAD-seq remains more effective than traditional methods for recovering population structure.

Applications in Conservation and Forensics

RAD-seq plays a key role in wildlife conservation and forensic investigations. Researchers use it to analyze genetic variation in threatened species, often relying on non-invasive samples such as hair, feathers, and feces. The technique enables population genomics studies that inform conservation strategies and management decisions.

Common applications include:

• Population genomics using low-quality DNA from non-invasive sources.
• Studying genetic diversity in archival samples to guide conservation efforts.
• Confirming species identity and source populations in wildlife forensics.
• Enhancing understanding of elusive species by combining RAD-seq with traditional markers.

Studies show that RAD-seq can recover expected population structure from degraded samples, although individual identification rates remain limited. Only about 32% of non-invasive samples generate SNP genotypes that pass quality control. Despite these challenges, RAD-seq provides valuable insights for conservation and forensic projects.

Sample Types and Collection Best Practices

Feathers and Hair — Collection and Storage

Researchers often collect feathers and hair to study wildlife genetics without causing harm. These samples usually contain low amounts of DNA, and environmental exposure can lead to degradation. To maximize DNA yield, they store feathers and hair in dry, cool conditions and avoid direct sunlight. Silica gel packets help reduce moisture. Clean forceps and gloves prevent contamination. Proper labeling and immediate storage in sealed containers maintain sample integrity.

Tip: Always use fresh gloves and tools for each sample to reduce cross-contamination.

Fin Clips and Swabs — Handling and Contamination

Fin clips and swabs serve as common sources of DNA in aquatic species. Fin clips consistently provide higher DNA yields compared to swabs.

• Fin clips: 49 samples, all met the DNA concentration threshold of 20 ng/μl.
• Skin swabs: 43 out of 88 samples met the threshold.
• Sequencing suitability: 93.88% of fin clips, 30.61% of skin swabs, and 7.69% of gill swabs were suitable.
• Average yield: Fin clips (263 ng/μl), skin swabs (112.8 ng/μl), pole swabs (9.6 ng/μl).

Researchers prefer fin clips for RAD-seq when possible. They use sterile scissors and tubes, and immediately freeze samples to preserve DNA. Swabs require gentle handling and rapid processing to avoid contamination from water or skin microbes.

Feces and Environmental Samples — Inhibitor Management

Fecal and environmental samples present unique challenges. DNA extractions from feces often contain PCR inhibitors, which complicate genotype detection. Host DNA usually makes up less than 5% of total fecal DNA, with most DNA coming from gut microbes and environmental organisms. This high proportion of non-host DNA can lower RAD-seq success rates. Researchers use specialized extraction kits and inhibitor removal steps to improve DNA quality. They also select short amplicons to increase the chance of successful genotyping.

Museum Specimens — Archival DNA Challenges

Museum specimens offer valuable historical insights, but DNA from these samples is often fragmented due to age.

• Museum specimens typically show shorter DNA fragment lengths.
• Library preparation may require starting with ~600 ng of DNA, which is three times more than standard protocols.
• Successful RAD-seq often needs at least 50 ng of DNA longer than 70 bp.

Researchers adjust protocols to account for degradation. They use gentle extraction methods and assess fragment size before library preparation. Careful handling and increased input DNA help ensure reliable results.

DNA Extraction from Challenging Samples

Figure 2. Non-invasive sampling and careful storage convert field samples into low-input DNA for RAD-seq.

Preservation Media and DNA Yield

Sample preservation plays a major role in DNA yield from low-input and non-invasive sources. Researchers often use ethanol, silica gel, or specialized buffers to stabilize DNA in feathers, fin clips, and feces. Ethanol preserves tissue by preventing enzymatic breakdown, while silica gel removes moisture and slows degradation. Some museum specimens may have been stored in formalin, which can cause DNA fragmentation and reduce yield. Researchers select preservation methods based on sample type and expected storage time. They measure DNA concentration with fluorometric assays, such as Qubit, to ensure enough material for downstream applications. High-quality preservation increases the chance of successful library preparation for RAD-seq.

Removing Inhibitors and Quality Control

Challenging samples often contain substances that inhibit PCR and reduce sequencing success. Feces, soil, and some archival tissues carry inhibitors like humic acids or proteins. Researchers use several protocols to remove these inhibitors and improve DNA quality:

• The PowerClean DNA Clean-Up kit removes a wide range of PCR inhibitors.
• The DNA IQ System shows similar effectiveness in cleaning up DNA.
• The Chelex-100 method removes fewer inhibitors and often leaves contaminants behind.
• Both PowerClean and DNA IQ systems help produce more complete genetic profiles compared to untreated samples.

Figure 3. Inhibitor removal methods and multi-level QC help rescue data from challenging low-input DNA.

After extraction, researchers assess DNA quality and suitability for sequencing. They use a combination of methods to check DNA and library quality:

Careful quality control ensures that only high-quality DNA enters the sequencing pipeline. This step reduces wasted resources and increases the reliability of genetic data.

RAD-seq Library Strategies for Low-Input DNA

2RAD, 3RAD, and quaddRAD Methods

Researchers often modify standard protocols to improve the success of RAD-seq with low-input and non-invasive samples. The 2RAD, 3RAD, and quaddRAD methods offer flexibility for challenging DNA sources. These approaches use two, three, or four restriction enzymes to increase the number of loci captured and reduce the risk of allelic dropout. By adjusting enzyme combinations, scientists can target more genomic regions, even when DNA is fragmented or present in small amounts.

The 2RAD method requires less DNA than traditional RAD-seq. The 3RAD protocol adds a third enzyme to further reduce adapter-dimer formation, which is common in low-input libraries. The quaddRAD approach uses four enzymes, increasing marker density and improving genotyping accuracy. These methods allow researchers to tailor their library preparation to the quality and quantity of available DNA.

Tip: When working with low-input samples, researchers should optimize enzyme selection and adapter concentrations to maximize data recovery.

hyRAD and RAD-capture for Degraded DNA

hyRAD and RAD-capture methods provide solutions for highly degraded or ancient DNA samples. These techniques use hybridization capture to enrich for specific genomic regions, making them ideal for museum specimens and archival material.

• hyRAD enables sequencing of orthologous loci from highly degraded DNA samples.
• This method retrieves sequence data from museum samples that are up to 100 years old.
• hyRAD-X improves loci definition and SNP calling accuracy by using an assembled transcriptome from high-quality tissue samples.
• RNA probes increase hybridization stringency, which is crucial for low-content DNA samples.
• Targeting the exome minimizes the risk of capturing paralogous loci, as repetitive regions are more common in noncoding DNA.
• RNA probes are more thermodynamically stable, reducing contamination and chimera formation risks.

Researchers select hyRAD or RAD-capture when standard RAD-seq protocols fail to recover enough data from degraded samples. These methods increase the likelihood of generating usable genetic markers from challenging material.

Indexing and Duplicate Management

Low-input DNA samples often require more PCR cycles during library preparation. This increases the risk of PCR duplicates, which can bias variant calling and reduce data quality. Researchers use unique dual indexing to track individual samples and minimize index hopping. They also implement duplicate removal steps during bioinformatics analysis.

The presence of PCR duplicates increases genotype error rates. Higher PCR cycles lead to more duplicates and higher error rates. Filtering out duplicates is essential for accurate variant calling. Datasets filtered for PCR duplicates show lower genotype error rates compared to unfiltered datasets. This highlights the importance of duplicate removal in low-input RAD-seq projects.

Note: Researchers should monitor PCR cycle numbers and use software tools to identify and remove duplicates before downstream analysis.

Depth, Replicates, and GT-seq Panels

Sequencing depth and technical replicates play a critical role in data reliability for low-input RAD-seq studies. Increasing sequencing depth helps compensate for allelic dropout and missing data. Technical replicates allow for the assessment of variability and error in the sequencing process. They help identify and control for potential batch effects. Replicates ensure data consistency and reproducibility.

Researchers often use GT-seq panels to genotype specific loci across many samples. These panels target informative SNPs identified from initial RAD-seq data. GT-seq provides a cost-effective way to validate results and expand studies to larger populations.

Tip: Including technical replicates and increasing sequencing depth improves confidence in genetic data from low-input and non-invasive samples.

Bioinformatics for Low-Coverage RAD-seq Data

Pre-processing and Contamination Screening

Researchers often begin bioinformatics analysis by checking raw sequencing data for contamination. They use tools such as FastQC to assess read quality and identify adapter sequences. Contaminant DNA from microbes or other organisms can appear in non-invasive samples. Scientists apply read trimming and filtering to remove low-quality bases and adapters. They may use software like Kraken or DeconSeq to screen for non-target DNA. These steps help ensure that only high-quality, host-specific reads move forward in the analysis pipeline.

Note: Careful pre-processing reduces the risk of false-positive variants and improves downstream genotyping accuracy.

Genotype Likelihood vs Hard-Call Pipelines

Low-coverage data from RAD-seq often challenges traditional genotype calling methods. Researchers must choose between genotype likelihood approaches and hard-call pipelines. Genotype likelihood methods, such as those implemented in ANGSD, estimate the probability of each genotype based on sequence data. These methods work well with low-coverage datasets and account for uncertainty. Hard-call pipelines, like Stacks, assign genotypes directly but may miss true variants when coverage is low. Scientists often prefer genotype likelihood approaches for non-invasive or degraded samples because they provide more reliable population genetic estimates.

Figure 4. A bioinformatics workflow for low-coverage RAD-seq emphasizes genotype likelihood pipelines over hard calls.

Filtering and Quality Thresholds

Filtering plays a critical role in balancing data retention and error minimization. Researchers avoid over-filtering on missingness in RAD-seq data. They set a permissive min_samples_locus to retain more loci for analysis. Addressing missingness in downstream analyses, rather than during initial filtering, helps preserve valuable genetic information.

• Avoid strict missingness filters.
• Use a permissive min_samples_locus setting.
• Handle missing data in later analysis steps.

These practices help maintain dataset integrity and maximize the utility of low-input samples. Researchers should tailor filtering thresholds to project goals and sample quality.

Starting Your Low-Input RAD-seq Project

Study Design and Sample Estimation

When planning a low-input RAD-seq project, start by mapping out each step from sampling to data analysis and estimating the DNA and sequencing resources required. This is especially important when working with rare, non-invasive, or archival samples.

A practical study design typically includes:
(1) evaluating extraction methods on a small pilot set,
(2) optimizing library construction and restriction enzyme choice,
(3) checking library quality and complexity, and
(4) confirming that sequencing depth and replicate strategy match your biological questions and budget.

Tip: Pilot extractions and small-scale sequencing runs help identify potential issues early and reduce costs.

Getting Support and Quotes

Project teams benefit from seeking support during planning and execution. Many sequencing facilities offer consultation services for study design and sample preparation. Researchers can request quotes for library preparation, sequencing, and bioinformatics analysis. Comparing quotes from multiple providers ensures cost-effectiveness and transparency.

When contacting vendors such as CD Genomics, briefly describe your biological questions, sample types, DNA quality, and budget to receive tailored RAD-seq recommendations.
A table can help organize information when contacting service providers:

Note: Clear communication with providers improves project outcomes and helps avoid unexpected costs.
Researchers can use RAD-seq with low-input and non-invasive samples by following careful protocols. Proper sample handling, extraction, and library preparation increase data quality. Teams should review best practices and consult experts for challenging projects.
Next steps:

1. Plan pilot studies to test protocols.
2. Contact CD Genomics or other sequencing providers for project design support.
3. Use technical replicates and quality controls.

Note: For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures or clinical decision-making.

FAQ

Related Reading:

• Using RAD-seq for Parentage Analysis and Population Assignment (PBT): Accuracy, SNP Panel Size, and Evaluation Methods
• Understanding RAD-seq: Principles, Workflows, and Best Practices