Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T15:54:46.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic diversity and admixture analysis of Sanfratellano and three other Italian horse breeds assessed by microsatellite markers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2008

A. Zuccaro ,
S. Bordonaro ,
A. Criscione ,
A. M. Guastella ,
G. Perrotta ,
M. Blasi ,
G. D’Urso  and
D. Marletta
A. Zuccaro
Affiliation:
DACPA, Sezione di Scienze delle Produzioni Animali, Università degli studi di Catania, Via Valdisavoia 5, 95123 Catania, Italy
S. Bordonaro
Affiliation:
DACPA, Sezione di Scienze delle Produzioni Animali, Università degli studi di Catania, Via Valdisavoia 5, 95123 Catania, Italy
A. Criscione
Affiliation:
DACPA, Sezione di Scienze delle Produzioni Animali, Università degli studi di Catania, Via Valdisavoia 5, 95123 Catania, Italy
A. M. Guastella
Affiliation:
DACPA, Sezione di Scienze delle Produzioni Animali, Università degli studi di Catania, Via Valdisavoia 5, 95123 Catania, Italy
G. Perrotta
Affiliation:
LGS – Laboratorio di Genetica e Servizi, Cremona, Italy
M. Blasi
Affiliation:
LGS – Laboratorio di Genetica e Servizi, Cremona, Italy
G. D’Urso
Affiliation:
DACPA, Sezione di Scienze delle Produzioni Animali, Università degli studi di Catania, Via Valdisavoia 5, 95123 Catania, Italy
D. Marletta*
Affiliation:
DACPA, Sezione di Scienze delle Produzioni Animali, Università degli studi di Catania, Via Valdisavoia 5, 95123 Catania, Italy
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Sanfratellano is a native Sicilian horse breed, mainly reared in the north east of the Island, developed in the 19th century from local dams and sires with a restricted introgression of Oriental, African and, more recently, Maremmano stallions. In this study, the genetic relationships and admixture among Sanfratellano, the other two Sicilian autochthonous breeds and Maremmano breed were assessed using a set of microsatellites. The main goals were to infer the impact of Maremmano breed in the current Sanfratellano horse and to provide genetic information useful to improve the selection strategies of the Sanfratellano horse. The whole sample included 384 horses (238 Sanfratellano, 50 Sicilian Oriental Purebred, 30 Sicilian Indigenous and 66 Maremmano), chosen avoiding closely related animals. A total of 111 alleles from 11 microsatellite loci were detected, from four at HTG7 to 15 at ASB2 locus. The mean number of alleles was the lowest in Oriental Purebred (6.7), the highest in Sanfratellano (8.3). All the breeds showed a high level of gene diversity (He) ranging from 0.71 ± 0.04 in Sicilian Oriental Purebred to 0.81 ± 0.02 in Sicilian Indigenous. The genetic differentiation index was low; only about 6% of the diversity was found among breeds. Nei’s standards (DS) and Reynolds’ (DR) genetic distances reproduced the same population ranking. Individual genetic distances and admixture analysis revealed that: (a) nowadays Maremmano breed does not significantly influence the current Sanfratellano breed; (b) within Sanfratellano breed, it is possible to distinguish two well-defined groups with different proportions of Indigenous blood.

Keywords

horse breedsmicrosatellitesgenetic relationshipsgenetic distancesadmixture analysis
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 2 , Issue 7 , July 2008 , pp. 991 - 998
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aberle, KS, Hamann, H, Drögemüller, C, Distl, O 2004. Genetic diversity in German draught horse breeds compared with a group of primitive, riding wild horses by means of microsatellite DNA markers. Animal Genetics 35, 270–277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Achmann, R, Curik, I, Dovc, P, Kavar, T, Bodo, I, Habe, F, Marti, E, Solkner, J, Brem, G 2004. Microsatellite diversity, population subdivision and gene flow in the Lipizzan horse. Animal Genetics 35, 285–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azor, PJ, Valera, M, Gòmez, MD, Goyache, F, Molina, A 2007. Genetic characterization of Spanish Trotter horse breed using microsatellite markers. Genetics and Molecular Biology 30, 37–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balbo, SM 1995. L’influenza dell’Arabo-Orientale sul cavallo Siciliano. In L’ASIL Arabo – Il cavallo nobile d’Arabia (ed. M Savier), pp. 169–175. R&R Editrice, Spoleto (PG) Italy.Google Scholar
Bjørnstad, G, Røed, KH 2002. Evaluation of factors affecting individual assignment precision using microsatellite data from horse breeds and simulated breed crosses. Animal Genetics 33, 264–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borgioli, E 1959. In Elementi di zootecnica speciale degli animali domestici agricoli, 6th edition (ed. G Barbèra), Firenze, Italy.Google Scholar
Bowcock, AM, Ruiz-Linares, A, Tomfohrde, J, Minch, E, Kidd, JR, Cavalli-Sforza, LL 1994. High resolution of human evolutionary trees with polymorphic microsatellites. Nature 368, 455–457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruford, MW, Bradley, DG, Luikart, G 2003. DNA markers reveal the complexity of livestock domestication. Nature Reviews Genetics 4, 900–910.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cañón, J, Checa, MI, Carleos, C, Vega-Pla, JI, Vallejo, M, Dunner, S 2000. The genetic structure of the Spanish Celtic horse breeds inferred from microsatellite data. Animal Genetics 31, 39–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chiari, E 1901. Trattato di ippologia , vol. 2 . Unione Tipografico-Editrice, Torino, Italy.Google Scholar
Chiofalo, L, Portolano, B, Liotta, L, Rundo Sotera, A, Finocchiaro, R 2003. Demographic characterization, inbreeding and genetic variability within Sanfratellano population horse from genealogical data. Italian Journal of Animal Science 2 (Suppl. 1), 592–594.Google Scholar
Cunningham, EP, Doley, JJ, Splan, RK, Bredley, DG 2001. Microsatellite diversity, pedigree relatedness and the contribution of the founder lineage to thoroughbred horses. Animal Genetics 32, 360–364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dieringer, D, Schlötterer, C 2003. Microsatellite analyser (MSA): a platform independent analysis tool for large microsatellite data sets. Molecular Ecology Notes 3, 167–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, EH 1994. The encyclopedia of the horse. Dorling Kindersley Limited, London, UK.Google Scholar
Falush, D, Stephens, M, Pritchard, JK 2003. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data: linked loci and correlated allele frequencies. Genetics 164, 1567–1587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fogliata, G 1910. Tipi e Razze Equine, 2nd edition. Tipografia Editrice. Cav. F. Mariotti, Pisa, Italy.Google Scholar
Gandini, G, Rognoni, G 1996. Atlante etnografico delle popolazioni equine ed asinine italiane. CNR IDVGA, Città Studi Edizioni, Milano, Italy.Google Scholar
Glowatzki-Mullis, ML, Muntwyler, J, Pfister, W, Marti, E, Rieder, S, Poncet, PA, Gaillard, C 2006. Genetic diversity among horse populations with a special focus on the Franches-Montagnes breed. Animal Genetics 37, 33–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goudet J 2001. FSTAT, a program to estimate and test gene diversity and fixation indices, version 2.9.3. Retrieved August 23, 2005 from http://www2.unil.ch/popgen/softwares/fstat.htmGoogle Scholar
Hedrick, PW 1983. Genetics of populations. Science Books International, Boston, MA, USA.Google Scholar
Hendricks, BL 1995. International encyclopedia of horse breeds. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK, USA.Google Scholar
Hurlbert, SH 1971. The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters. Ecology 52, 577–586.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jakobsson, M, Rosenberg, NA 2007. CLUMPP: a cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23, 1801–1806.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langella O 2002. Population 1.2.28. Logiciel de génétique des populations. http://www.legs.cnrs-gif.fr. Laboratoire Populations, génétique et évolution, CNRS UPR 9034, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.Google Scholar
Liotta L and Chiofalo L 2004. Evoluzione morfo-biometrica della popolazione cavallina Sanfratellana. Atti 6° Convegno Società Italiana di Ippologia ‘New findings in equine practices’ 7-8-9 Luglio 2004, Campobasso, Italy, pp. 51–55.Google Scholar
Lippi, AS, Mortari, N 2003. Studies of blood groups and protein polymorphisms in the Brazilian horse breed Mangalarga Marchador and Mangalarga (Equus caballus). Genetics and Molecular Biology 26, 431–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luis, C, Cothran, EG, Oom, MM 2007. Inbreeding and genetic structure in the endangered Sorraia horse breed: implication for its conservation and management. Journal of Heredity 98, 232–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marletta, D, Tupac-Yupanqui, I, Bordonaro, S, Garcia, D, Guastella, AM, Criscione, A, Cañón, J, Dunner, S 2006. Analysis of genetic diversity and the determination of relationships among western Mediterranean horse breeds using microsatellite markers. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 123, 315–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Minch E, Ruiz-Linares A, Goldstein DB, Feldman MW and Cavalli-Sforza LL 1998. Microsat2: A Computer Program for Calculating Various Statistics on Microsatellite Allele Data. Software available at http://hpgl.stanford.edu/projects/microsat/. Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.Google Scholar
Morais, J, Oom, MM, Malta-Vacas, J, Luis, C 2005. Genetic structure of an endangered Portuguese semiferal pony breed, the Garrano. Biochemical Genetics 43, 347–364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nei, M 1987. Molecular evolutionary genetics. Columbia University Press, New York, NY, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, JK, Stephens, M, Donnelly, P 2000. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raymond, M, Rousset, F 1995. GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact test and ecumenicism. Journal of Heredity 86, 248–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, J, Weir, BS, Cockerham, C 1983. Estimation of the coancestry coefficient: basis for a short-term genetic distance. Genetics 105, 767–779.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saitou, N, Nei, M 1987. The neighbour-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 4, 406–425.Google Scholar
Solis, A, Jugo, BM, Mériaux, JC, Iriondo, M, Mazòn, LI, Aguirre, AI, Vicario, A, Estomba, A 2005. Genetic diversity within and among four south European native horse breed on microsatellite DNA analysis: applications for conservation. Journal of Heredity 96, 670–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamura, K, Dudley, J, Nei, M, Kumar, S 2007. MEGA4: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) software version 4.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 24, 1596–1599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tozaki, T, Takezaky, N, Hasegawa, T, Ishida, N, Kurosawa, M, Tomita, M, Saitou, N, Mukoyama, H 2003. Microsatellite variation in Japanese and Asian horses and their phylogenetic relationship using a European horse outgroup. Journal of Heredity 94, 374–380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weir, BS, Cockerham, CC 1984. Estimating F statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38, 1358–1370.Google ScholarPubMed
Zabek, T, Nogaj, A, Radko, A, Nagaj, J, Slota, E 2005. Genetic variation of Polish endangered Bilgaraj horses and two common horse breeds in microsatellite loci. Journal of Applied Genetics 46, 299–305.Google ScholarPubMed