Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T07:19:45.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The value of genome mapping for the genetic conservation of cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

J.L. Williams
J.L. Williams*
Affiliation:
Department of Genomics and Bioinformatics, Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian, EH25 9PS, UK
Get access

Abstract

Molecular markers can be used to explore the diversity present in livestock populations. In cattle the diversity among breeds, revealed using molecular markers, is greater than the within breed diversity. Therefore both at the phenotypic and genetic level breeds form discrete populations, which could be used to conserve maximum diversity in the species. The best way to conserve breeds is to ensure their commercial utility; therefore selection of breeds for commercially advantageous phenotypes should be encouraged. Gene mapping studies suggest that, even for complex traits, there may be very few genes involved in controlling variation in the phenotype. Therefore selection for a particular trait does not necessarily affect the genetic base of the population, other than at the genes under selection. This seems to be the situation in the Hereford breed, where the phenotype has changed considerably over the past 50 years, while blood group data suggests that the genetic base of the population has not been greatly affected. Genome mapping approaches allow first the chromosomal location and ultimately the genes controlling traits to be identified. This information provides DNA markers for favourable alleles at trait genes that can be used in selective breeding programmes to improve breeds for a range of traits. Work on double muscling in Belgian Blue cattle has shown that a single gene, myostatin, can be responsible for an extreme phenotype, so selection for double muscling potentially only affects diversity around this gene. However, the examination of the phenotypes associated with this gene in other breeds suggests that genes in addition to myostatin are involved in the development of the extreme phenotype. Thus information on single genes is too narrow to be of value in making conservation decisions. With the current state of knowledge genetic information can aid the choice of individuals to use for breeding and for conservation of diversity, but the information should be used with caution and in conjunction with additional information, such as pedigree, phenotype or function data.

Type
Section 2: Quantitative and molecular genetic basis for conservation
Information
BSAP Occasional Publication , Volume 30: Farm Animal Genetic Resources , 2004 , pp. 133 - 149
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2004

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

Band, M.R., Larson, J.H., Redeiz, M., Green, C.A., Heyen, D.W., Donovan, J., Windish, R., Steining, C., Mahyuddin, P., Womack, J.E., and Lewin, H.A. 2000. An ordered map of the cattle and human genomes. Genome Research 10: 1359–1368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barendse, W.,Vaiman, D., Kemp, S.J., Sugimoto, Y., Armitage, S.M., Williams, J.L., et al. 1997. A medium-density genetic linkage map of the bovine genome. Mammalian Genome 8: 21–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barker, J.S.F., Bradley, D.G., Fries, R., Hill, W.G., Nei, W. and Wayne, R.K. 1993. An integrated global programme to establish the genetic relationships among the breeds of each domestic species. Animal production and health division Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Bishop, M.D., Kappes, S.M., Keele, J.W., Stone, R.T., Sunden, S.L.F., Hawkins, G,A., Toldo, S.S., Fries, R., Grosz, M.D., Yoo, J.Y., Beattie, C.W. 1994. A genetic linkage map for cattle. Genetics 136: 619–639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blott, S.C., Williams, J.L., and Haley, C.S. 1998. Genetic variation within the Hereford breed of cattle. Animal Genetics 29: 202–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blott, S.C., Williams, J.L. and Haley, C.S. 1999. Discriminating among between cattle breeds using genetic markers. Heredity 6: 613–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, D.G., MacHugh, D.E., Cunningham, P. and Loftus, R.T. 1996. Mitochondrial diversity and origins of African and European cattle. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 93: 5131–5135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casas, E., Stone, R.T., Keele, J.W., Shackelford, S.D., Kappes, S.M., and Koohmaraie, M. 2001. A comprehensive search for quantitative trait loci affecting growth and carcass composition of cattle segregating alternative forms of the myostatin gene. Journal of Animal Science 79: 854–860.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charlier, C., Coppieters, W., Farnir, F., Grobet, L., Leroy, P.L., Michaux, C., Mni, M., Schwers, A., Vanmanshoven, P., Hanset, R. and Georges, M. 1995. The Mh Gene Causing Double-Muscling in Cattle Maps to Bovine Chromosome-2. Mammalian Genome 6: 788–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chowdhary, B.P., Fronicke, L., Gustavson, I., and Scherthan, H. 1996. Comparative analysis of the cattle and human genomes: detection of ZOO-FISH and gene mapping based chromosomal homologies. Mammalian Genome 7: 297–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunner, S., Charlier, C., Farnr, F., Brouwers, B., Canon, J. and Georges, M. 1997. Towards interbreed IBD fine mapping of the mh locus: Double-muscling in the Asturiana de los Valles breed involves the same locus as in the Belgian Blue cattle breed. Mammalian Genome 8: 430–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freyer, G., Liu, Z., Erhardt, G. and Panicke, L. 1999. Casein polymorphism and relation between milk production traits. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 116: 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Georges, M., Nielsen, D., Mackinnon, M., Mishra, A., Okimoto, R., Pasquino, A. T., Sargeant, L. Sorensen, A., Steele, M. R., Zhao, X., Womack, J., and Hoeschele, I. 1995. Mapping quantitative trait loci controlling milk production in dairy cattle by exploiting progeny testing. Genetics 139: 907–920.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grigson, C. (1989) Size and sex: the evidence for domestication of cattle in the near east. In: The Beginnings of Agriculture. Edited by Milles, A., Williams, D., and Gardener, G. BAR International Series 496. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, UK. pp. 77–109.Google Scholar
Grisart, B., Coppieters, W., Farnir, F., Karim, L., Ford, C., Berzi, P., Cambisano, N., Mni, M., Reid, S., Simon, P., Spelman, R., Georges, M., and Snell, R. 2002. Positional candidate cloning of a QTL in dairy cattle: Identification of a missense mutation in the bovine DGAT1 gene with major effect on milk yield and composition. Genome Research 12: 222–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grobet, L., Martin, L. J. R., Poncelet, D., Pirottin, D., Brouwers, B., Riquet, J., Schoeberlein, A., Dunner, S., Ménissier, F., Massabanda, J., Fries, R., Hanset, R., and Georges, M. 1997. A deletion in the bovine myostatin gene causes the double-muscled phenotype in cattle. Nature Genetics 17: 71-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, S.J.G., and Bradley, D.G. 1995. Conserving livestock breed diversity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10: 267–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, H., 1995. Chromosome painting with human chromosome-specific DNA libraries reveals the extent and distribution of conserved segments in bovine chromosomes. Cytogenetics and Cell Genetics 71: 168–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kappes, S.M., Bennett, G.L., Keele, J.W., Echternkamp, S.E., Gregory, K.E., Thallman, R.M. 2000. Initial results of genomic scans for ovulation rate in a cattle population selected for increased twinning rate. Journal of Animal Science 78: 3053–3059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kühn, C. H., Freyer, G., Weikard, R., Goldammer, T., and Schwerin, M. 1999. Detection of QTL for milk production traits in cattle by application of a specifically developed marker map of BTA6. Animal Genetics 30: 333–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loftus, R.T., MacHugh, D.E., Bradley, D.G., Sharp, P.M. and Cunningham, P. 1994. Evidence for two separate domestications of cattle. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 91: 2757–2761.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loftus, R.T. ands Scherf, B. (eds) 1993. World watch list for domestic animal diversity. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
MacHugh, D.E., Loftus, R.T., Bradley, D.G., Sharp, P.M. and Cunningham, E.P. 1994. Microsatellite DNA variation within and among European cattle breeds. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 256: 25–31.Google ScholarPubMed
Mbap, S.T., and Ngere, L.O. 1995. Upgrading of White Fulani Cattle in Vom Using Friesian Bulls. Tropical Agriculture 72: 152–157.Google Scholar
McCarthy, L.C. 1996. Whole genome radiation hybrid mapping. Trends in Genetics 12: 491–493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McPherron, A.C., Lawler, A.M., and Lee, S.J. 1997. Regulation of skeletal muscle mass in mice by a new TGF-beta superfamily member. Nature 387: 83–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McPherron, A. C., and Lee, S-J. 1997. Double-muscling in cattle due to mutations in the myostatin gene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 94: 12457–12461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mirck, M.H., vonBannissehtwijsmuller, T., Timmermansbesselink, W.J.H., vanLuijk, J.H.L., and Buntjer, J.B. 1995. Optimization of the pcr test for the mutation causing bovine leukocyte adhesion deficiency. Cellular and Molecular Biology 41: 695–698.Google ScholarPubMed
Moazami-Goudazi, K., Laloe, D., Furet, J.P. and Grosclaude, F. 1997. Analysis of genetic relationships between ten cattle breeds with seventeen microsatellites. Animal Genetics 28: 338–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagahata, H., Miura, T., Tagaki, K., Ohtake, M., Noda, H., Yasuda, T. and Nioka, K. 1997. Bovine Leukocyte Adhesion Deficiency (BLAD) in Holstein-Friesian cattle in Japan. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science 59: 233–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Philipsson, J., Banos, G. and Arnason, T. 1994. Present and future uses of selection index methodology in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 3252–3261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scherf, B. 1995. World Watch List for Domesticated Animal Diversity 2nd edition. Edited by Scherf, B.. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), Rome.Google Scholar
Shuster, D.E., Kehrli, M.E., Akermann, M.R. and Gilbert, R.O. 1992. Identification and prevalence of a genetic defect that causes leukocyte adhesion deficiency in Holstein Cattle. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 89: 9225–2229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, J. A., Lewis, A. M., Wiener, P. and Williams, J L. 2000. Genetic variation in the bovine myostatin gene in UK beef cattle: Allele frequencies and haplotype analysis in the South Devon. Animal Genetics 31: 306–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Solinas-Toldo, S., Lenguaer, C., and Fries, R. 1995. Comparative genome mapping of human and cattle. Genomics 27: 489–496.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spelman, R. J., Woppieters, W., Karim, L., van Arendonk, J. A. M., and Bovenhuis, H. 1996. Quantitative trait loci analysis for five milk production traits on chromosome six in the Dutch Holstein-Friesian population. Genetics 144: 1799–1808.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stone, R.T., Keele, J.W., Shackelford, S.D., Kappes, S.M. and Koohmaraie, M. 1999. A primary screen of the bovine genome for quantitative trait loci affecting carcass and growth traits. Journal of Animal Science 77: 1379–1384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Takezaki, N. and Nei, M. 1996. Genetic distances and reconstruction of phylogenetic trees from micro-satellite DNA. Genetics 144: 389–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tammen, I., Klippert, H., Kuczka, A., Treviranus, A., Pohlenz, J., Stober, M., Simon, D., and Harlizius, B. 1996. An improved DNA test for bovine leucocyte adhesion deficiency. Research in Veterinary Science 60: 218–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teale, A., Agaba, M., Clapcott, S., Gelhaus, A., Haley, C., Hanotte, O., Horstmann, R., Iraqi, F., Kemp, S., Nilsson, P., Schwerin, M., Sekikawa, K., Soller, M., Sugimoto, Y., and Womack, J. 1999. Resistance to trypanosomosis: of markers, genes and mechanisms. Archives of Animal Breeding 42: 36–41.Google Scholar
Usha, A.P. 1995. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Visscher, P.M., Hill, W.G. and Thompson, R. 1992. Univariate and Multivariate Parameter Estimates for Milk-Production Traits Using an Animal-Model .2. Efficiency of Selection When Using Simplified Covariance-Structures. Genetics, Selection and Evolution 24: 431–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, P., Smith, J.A., Lewis, A.M. Woolliams, J.A. and Williams, J.L. 2002. Muscle-related traits in cattle: The role of the myostatin gene in the South Devon breed. Genetics, Selection and Evolution 34: 221–232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willham, R.L. 1987. Taking Stock. Iowa State University, Ames, USA.Google Scholar
Williams, J.L. 2002. Advances in molecular genetics applied to animal breeding. British Cattle Breeders Club Digest 57: 12–13.Google Scholar
Williams, J.L., Eggen, A., Ferretti, L., Farr, C., Gautier, G., Amati, G., Ball, G., Caramori, T., Critcher, R., Costa, S., Hextall, P., Hills, D., Jeulin, A., Kiguwa, S.L., Ross, O., Smith, A.L., Saunier, K.L., Urquhart, B.G.D., and Waddington, D. 2002. A Bovine Whole Genome Radiation Hybrid Panel and Outline Map. Mammalian Genome 13: 469–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, S. 1977. Evolution and the Genetics of Populations, Vol 3. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.Google Scholar