Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T03:29:42.258Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relative breed contributions to neutral genetic diversity of a comprehensive representation of Iberian native cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2011

J. Cañón ,
D. García ,
J. V. Delgado ,
S. Dunner ,
L. Telo da Gama ,
V. Landi ,
I. Martín-Burriel ,
A. Martínez ,
C. Penedo  and
C. Rodellar
...Show all authors
J. Cañón*
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain
D. García
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain
J. V. Delgado
Affiliation:
Departamento de Genética, Universidad de Córdoba, Campus Rabanales C-5, 14071 Córdoba, Spain
S. Dunner
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain
L. Telo da Gama
Affiliation:
UIRGRMA-INIA, Instituto Nacional dos Recursos Biológicos, Fonte Boa, 2005-048 Vale de Santarém, Portugal
V. Landi
Affiliation:
Departamento de Genética, Universidad de Córdoba, Campus Rabanales C-5, 14071 Córdoba, Spain
I. Martín-Burriel
Affiliation:
Laboratorio de Genética Bioquímica, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Zaragoza, Miguel Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain
A. Martínez
Affiliation:
Departamento de Genética, Universidad de Córdoba, Campus Rabanales C-5, 14071 Córdoba, Spain
C. Penedo
Affiliation:
Veterinary Genetics Laboratory, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA
C. Rodellar
Affiliation:
Laboratorio de Genética Bioquímica, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Zaragoza, Miguel Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain
P. Zaragoza
Affiliation:
Laboratorio de Genética Bioquímica, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Zaragoza, Miguel Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain
C. Ginja
Affiliation:
UIRGRMA-INIA, Instituto Nacional dos Recursos Biológicos, Fonte Boa, 2005-048 Vale de Santarém, Portugal Veterinary Genetics Laboratory, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This study is aimed at establishing priorities for the optimal conservation of genetic diversity among a comprehensive group of 40 cattle breeds from the Iberian Peninsula. Different sets of breed contributions to diversity were obtained with several methods that differ in the relative weight attributed to the within- and between-breed components of the genetic variation. The contributions to the Weitzman diversity and the expected heterozygosity (He) account for between- and within-breed variation only, respectively. Contributions to the core set obtained for several kinship matrices, incorporate both sources of variation, as well as the combined contributions of Ollivier and Foulley and those of Caballero and Toro. In general, breeds that ranked high in the different core set applications also ranked high in the contribution to the global He, for example, Sayaguesa, Retinta, Monchina, Berrenda en Colorado or Marismeña. As expected, the Weitzman method prioritised breeds with low contributions to the He, like Mallorquina, Menorquina, Berrenda en Negro, Mostrenca, Vaca Palmera or Mirandesa, all showing highly negative contributions to He – that is, their removal would significantly increase the average He. Weighing the within- and between-breed components with the FST produced a balanced set of contributions in which all the breeds ranking high in both approaches show up. Unlike the other methods, the contributions to the diversity proposed by Caballero and Toro prioritised a good number of Portuguese breeds (Arouquesa, Barrosã, Mertolenga and Preta ranking highest), but this might be caused by a sample size effect. Only Sayaguesa ranked high in all the methods tested. Considerations with regard to the conservation scheme should be made before adopting any of these approaches: in situv. cryoconservation, selection and adaptation within the breeds v. crossbreeding or the creation of synthetic breeds. There is no general consensus with regard to balancing within- and between-breed diversity and the decision of which source to favour will depend on the particular scenario. In addition to the genetic information, other factors, such as geographical, historical, economic, cultural, etc., also need to be considered in the formulation of a conservation plan. All these aspects will ultimately influence the distribution of resources by the decision-makers.

Keywords

Iberian cattlediversityconservation prioritiesmicrosatellites
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 5 , Issue 9 , 05 August 2011 , pp. 1323 - 1334
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

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

Barker, JSF 1999. Conservation of livestock breed diversity. Animal Genetic Resources Information 25, 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennewitz, J, Meuwissen, THE 2004. Investigations on the selection of breeds for conservation of genetic variance. In 55th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production (ed. Y van der Honing), EAAP Book of Abstracts, Vol. 10. Bled, Slovenia.Google Scholar
Bennewitz, J, Kantanen, J, Tapio, I, Li, MH, Kalm, E, Vilkki, J, Ammosov, I, Ivanova, Z, Kiselyova, T, Popov, R, Meuwissen, TH 2006. Estimation of breed contributions to present and future genetic diversity of 44 North Eurasian cattle breeds using core set diversity measures. Genetics Selection and Evolution 38, 201–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boettcher, PJ, Tixier-Boichard, M, Toro, MA, Simianer, H, Eding, H, Gandini, G, Joost, S, Garcia, D, Colli, L, Ajmone-Marsan, P 2010. Objectives, criteria and methods for using molecular genetic data in priority setting for conservation of animal genetic resources. Animal Genetics 41 (suppl. 1), 64–77.Google Scholar
Caballero, A, Toro, MA 2002. Analysis of genetic diversity for the management of conserved subdivided populations. Conservation Genetics 3, 289–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caballero, A, Rodriguez-Ramilo, ST, Avila, V, Fernández, J 2010. Management of genetic diversity of subdivided populations in conservation programmes. Conservation Genetics 11, 409–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cañon, J, Tupac-Yupanqui, I, García-Atance, MA, Cortés, O, García, D, Fernández, J, Dunner, S 2008. Genetic variation within the Lidia bovine breed. Animal Genetics 39, 439–445.Google Scholar
Cañon, J, Alexandrino, P, Bessa, I, Carleos, C, Carretero, Y, Dunner, S, Ferrand, N, García, D, Jordana, J, Laloe, D, Pereira, A, Sanchez, A, Moazami-Goudarzi, K 2001. Genetic diversity measures of local European beef cattle breeds for conservation purposes. Genetics Selection and Evolution 33, 311–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chaiwong, N, Kinghorn, BP 1999. Use of genetic markers to aid conservation decisions for groups of rare domestic breeds. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 13, 365–368.Google Scholar
Cortes, O, Tupac-Yupanqui, I, Dunner, S, Garcia-Atance, MA, Garcia, D, Fernandez, J, Canon, J 2008. Ancestral matrilineages and mitochondrial DNA diversity of the Lidia cattle breed. Animal Genetics 39, 649–654.Google Scholar
Cymbron, T, Freeman, AR, Isabel Malheiro, M, Vigne, JD, Bradley, DG 2005. Microsatellite diversity suggests different histories for Mediterranean and Northern European cattle populations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological sciences 272, 1837–1843.Google Scholar
Eding, H, Meuwissen, TH 2001. Marker-assisted estimates of between and within population kinships from genetic marker data for the construction of core sets in genetic conservation schemes. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 118, 141–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eding, H, Meuwissen, THE 2003. Linear methods to estimate kinships from genetic marker data for construction of core sets in genetic conservation schemes. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 120, 289–302.Google Scholar
Eding, H, Crooijmans, RP, Groenen, MA, Meuwissen, TH 2002. Assessing the contribution of breeds to genetic diversity in conservation schemes. Genetics Selection and Evolution 34, 613–633.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
European Cattle Genetic Diversity Consortium 2006. Marker-assisted conservation of European cattle breeds: an evaluation. Animal Genetics 37, 475–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabuel, E, Barragan, C, Silio, L, Rodriguez, MC, Toro, MA 2004. Analysis of genetic diversity and conservation priorities in Iberian pigs based on microsatellite markers. Heredity 93, 104–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, DS, Mackay, TFC 1996. Introduction to quantitative genetics. Longman, Essex, UK.Google Scholar
Fernández, J, Toro, MA, Caballero, A 2008. Management of subdivided populations in conservation programs: development of a novel dynamic system. Genetics 179, 683–692.Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) 1993. Secondary guidelines for development of National Farm Animal Genetic Resources Management Plans for measurement of domestic animal diversity (MoDAD). FAO, Original Working Group Report, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) 2004. Measurement of domestic animal diversity – a review of recent diversity studies. FAO of the United Nations, Commission on Genetic Resources, Working Group on Animal Genetic Resources, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Garcia, D, Corral, N, Canon, J 2005. Combining inter- and intrapopulation information with the Weitzman approach to diversity conservation. Journal of Heredity 96, 704–712.Google Scholar
Gibbs, RA, Taylor, JF, Van Tassell, CP, Barendse, W, Eversole, KA, Gill, CA, Green, RD, Hamernik, DL, Kappes, SM, Lien, S, Matukumalli, LK, McEwan, JC, Nazareth, LV, Schnabel, RD, Weinstock, GM, Wheeler, DA, Ajmone-Marsan, P, Boettcher, PJ, Caetano, AR, Garcia, JF, Hanotte, O, Mariani, P, Skow, LC, Sonstegard, TS, Williams, JL, Diallo, B, Hailemariam, L, Martinez, ML, Morris, CA, Silva, LO, Spelman, RJ, Mulatu, W, Zhao, K, Abbey, CA, Agaba, M, Araujo, FR, Bunch, RJ, Burton, J, Gorni, C, Olivier, H, Harrison, BE, Luff, B, Machado, MA, Mwakaya, J, Plastow, G, Sim, W, Smith, T, Thomas, MB, Valentini, A, Williams, P, Womack, J, Woolliams, JA, Liu, Y, Qin, X, Worley, KC, Gao, C, Jiang, H, Moore, SS, Ren, Y, Song, XZ, Bustamante, CD, Hernandez, RD, Muzny, DM, Patil, S, San Lucas, A, Fu, Q, Kent, MP, Vega, R, Matukumalli, A, McWilliam, S, Sclep, G, Bryc, K, Choi, J, Gao, H, Grefenstette, JJ, Murdoch, B, Stella, A, Villa-Angulo, R, Wright, M, Aerts, J, Jann, O, Negrini, R, Goddard, ME, Hayes, BJ, Bradley, DG, Barbosa da Silva, M, Lau, LP, Liu, GE, Lynn, DJ, Panzitta, F, Dodds, KG 2009. Genome-wide survey of SNP variation uncovers the genetic structure of cattle breeds. Science 324, 528–532.Google Scholar
Ginja, C, Telo Da Gama, L, Penedo, MC 2010a. Analysis of STR markers reveals high genetic structure in Portuguese native cattle. Journal of Heredity 101, 201–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ginja, C, Penedo, MC, Sobral, MF, Matos, J, Borges, C, Neves, D, Rangel-Figueiredo, T, Cravador, A 2010b. Molecular genetic analysis of a cattle population to reconstitute the extinct Algarvia breed. Genetics Selection and Evolution 42, 18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ginja, C, Penedo, MC, Melucci, L, Quiroz, J, Martinez Lopez, OR, Revidatti, MA, Martinez-Martinez, A, Delgado, JV, Gama, LT 2010c. Origins and genetic diversity of New World Creole cattle: inferences from mitochondrial and Y chromosome polymorphisms. Animal Genetics 41, 128–141.Google Scholar
Hayes, B, He, J, Moen, T, Bennewitz, J 2006. Use of molecular markers to maximise diversity of founder populations for aquaculture breeding programs. Aquaculture 255, 573–578.Google Scholar
Hodges, J 1992. The management of global animal genetic resources. Food and Agriculture Organisation, Animal Production and Health Paper 104, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Martín-Burriel, I, García-Muro, E, Zaragoza, P 1999. Genetic diversity analysis of six Spanish native cattle breeds using microsatellites. Animal Genetics 30, 177–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martín-Burriel, I, Rodellar, C, Lenstra, JA, Sanz, A, Cons, C, Osta, R, Reta, M, De Arguello, S, Zaragoza, P 2007. Genetic diversity and relationships of endangered Spanish cattle breeds. Journal of Heredity 98, 687–691.Google Scholar
Mateus, JC, Eding, H, Penedo, MC, Rangel-Figueiredo, MT 2004. Contributions of Portuguese cattle breeds to genetic diversity using marker-estimated kinships. Animal Genetics 35, 305–313.Google Scholar
Meuwissen, T 2009. Towards consensus on how to measure neutral genetic diversity? Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 126, 333–334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ollivier, L, Foulley, JL 2005. Aggregate diversity: new approach combining within- and between-breed genetic diversity. Livestock Production Science 95, 247–254.Google Scholar
Perez-Figueroa, A, Saura, M, Fernández, J, Toro, MA, Caballero, A 2009. METAPOP – a software for the management and analysis of subdivided populations in conservation programs. Conservation Genetics 10, 1097–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piyasatian, N, Kinghorn, BP 2003. Balancing genetic diversity, genetic merit and population viability in conservation programmes. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 120, 137–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, J, Weir, BS, Cockerham, CC 1983. Estimation of the coancestry coefficient: basis for a short-term genetic distance. Genetics 105, 767–779.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Belda, A 1984. Razas bovinas Españolas. Publicaciones de Extesión Agraria. MAPA, Madrid.Google Scholar
Scherf, BD 2000. World watch list for domestic animal diversity. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Tapio, I, Varv, S, Bennewitz, J, Maleviciute, J, Fimland, E, Grislis, Z, Meuwissen, TH, Miceikiene, I, Olsaker, I, Viinalass, H, Vilkki, J, Kantanen, J 2006. Prioritization for conservation of northern European cattle breeds based on analysis of microsatellite data. Conservation Biology 20, 1768–1779.Google Scholar
Toro, MA, Caballero, A 2005. Characterization and conservation of genetic diversity in subdivided populations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological Sciences 360, 1367–1378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, J, Hill, WG 2000. Marker-assisted selection to increase effective population size by reducing Mendelian segregation variance. Genetics 154, 475–489.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weitzman, ML 1992. On diversity. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 107, 363–405.Google Scholar
Windig, JJ, Engelsma, KA 2010. Perspectives of genomics for genetic conservation of livestock. Conservation Genetics 11, 635–641.Google Scholar
Wright, S 1951. The genetical structure of populations. Annals of Eugenics 15, 323–354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed