Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T11:06:37.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of Inbreeding on Reproductive Losses in Kota Tribe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

T. A. Sivakumaran*
Affiliation:
Department of Human Genetics, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam
S. Karthikeyan
Affiliation:
Department of Biophysics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
*
Division of Genetics, Department of Anatomy, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi – 110 029, India

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Sanghvi's hypothesis on long term effects of inbreeding was tested in Kotas. Kota is a numerically small tribal population in the Nilgiri district, Tamil Nadu State, India. Consanguineous marriages are common in this tribe. A total of 95 couples were taken for this study and necessary data were collected on a set proforma. Of the 95 couples, 28 (29.5%) were consanguineously related. The inbreeding coefficient for autosomal genes is 0.022 and for sex-linked genes is 0.03. Inbreeding effects on reproductive losses were examined through an exponential regression model. Although the regression coefficient B values are positive, they are insignificant, suggesting no consistent relationship between degree of consanguinity and the reproductive losses. The estimates of genetic load is 1.8 lethal equivalents per gamete and the average B/A ratio is 5. These findings empirically support the Sanghvi's contention.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1997

References

REFERENCES

1.Basu, SK (1975): Effects of consanguinity among North Indian Muslims. Journal of Population Research 2: 5768.Google Scholar
2.Bittles, AH, Devi, ARR, Savithri, HS, Sridhar, R, Appaji Rao, N (1985): Inbreeding and post-natal mortality in South India: Effects on the gene pool. J Genet 64: 135142.Google Scholar
3.Bittles, AH, Devi, ARR, Savithri, HS, Sridhar, R, Appaji Rao, N (1987): Consanguineous marriages and post-natal mortality in Karnataka, South India. Man (ns) 22: 736745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Bressler, JB (1970): Outcrossing in Caucasians and fetal loss. Soc Biol 17: 1725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Cavalli-Sforza, LL, Bodmer, WF (1971): “The Genetics of Human Populations.” San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
6.Chakraborty, R, Chakravarti, A (1977): On consanguineous marriages and the genetic load. Hum Genet 36: 4754.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Darlington, CD (1960): Cousin marriages and the evolution of the breeding system in man. Heredity 14: 297331.Google Scholar
8.Darlington, CD (1961): Cousin marriage and population structure. Eugen Rev 53: 139144.Google ScholarPubMed
9.Devi, ARR, Appaji Rao, N, Bittles, AH, (1981): Consanguinity, fecundity and post-natal mortality in Karnataka, South India. Ann Hum Biol 8: 469472.Google Scholar
10.Freire-Maia, N (1963): The load of lethal mutations in Whites and Negro Brazilian populations. II. Second survey. Acta Genet Basel 13: 199225.Google Scholar
11.Freire-Maia, N, Krieger, H (1963): A Jewish isolate in Southern Brazil, effective population, intermarriage, fertility, inbreeding, mortality, twinning, sex ratio, genetic load and total mutation rate. Am J Hum Genet 27: 3139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Freire-Maia, A, Stevenson, C, Morton, NE (1974): Hybridity effect on mortality. Soc Biol 21: 232234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Ghosh, AK, Majumder, PP (1979): Genetic load in an isolated tribal population of South India. Hum Genet 51: 203208.Google Scholar
14.Kumar, S, Pai, RA, Swaminathan, MS (1967): Consanguineous marriages and genetic load due to lethal genes in Kerala. Ann Hum Genet 31: 141147.Google Scholar
15.Legrand Rev, F (1955): Tribes of the Nilgiris – The Kotas Madras. “In Tamil Culture.” Vol 14: 321322.Google Scholar
16.Marcallo, FA, Freire-Maia, N, Azevedo, JBC, Simoes, IA (1964): Inbreeding effects on mortality and morbidity in South Brazilian populations. Ann Hum Genet 27: 203218.Google Scholar
17.Morton, NE, Crow, JF, Muller, HJ (1956): An estimate of mutational damage in man from data on consanguineous marriages. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 42: 855863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Murthy, JS, Jamil, T (1972): Inbreeding load in the newborns of Hyderabad. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 21: 327331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Peritz, Z (1971): A statical study of the intra-utrine selection factors related to the ABO system. II. The analysis of fetal mortality data. Ann Hum Genet 34: 389394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Rao, PSS, Inbaraj, SG (1977): Inbreeding effects on human reproduction in Tamil Nadu of South India. Ann Hum Genet 41: 8798.Google Scholar
21.Rao, PSS, Inbaraj, SG (1979): Trends in human reproductive wastage in relation to long-term practice of inbreeding. Ann Hum Genet 42: 281288.Google Scholar
22.Reddy, BM (1992): Inbreeding effects on reproductive outcome: A study based on a large sample from the endogamous Vadde of Kolleru Lake, Andhra Pradesh, India. Hum Biol 64: 659682.Google Scholar
23.Reddy, VR, Naidu, GP (1978): Effects of consanguinity on fertility and mortality in the Gampasati Kammas of Andhra Pradesh. “In Verma, IC (eds) Medical Genetics in India.” Vol 2. Pondicherry: Auroma Enterprises.Google Scholar
24.Roberts, DF, Bonne, B (1973): Reproduction and inbreeding among the Samaritans. Soc Biol 20: 6470.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Sanghvi, LD (1966): Inbreeding in India. Eugen Q 13: 291301.Google Scholar
26.Sanghvi, LD (1974): The genetic consequences of inbreeding and outbreeding. “In The Role of Natural Selection in Human Evolution. Burg wartenstein Symposium Series. 63.”Google Scholar
27.Schull, WJ, Neel, JV (1965): “The effects of inbreeding on Japanese Children.” New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
28.Schull, WJ, Neel, JV (1966): Some further observation on the effects of inbreeding on mortality in Kure, Japan. Am J Hum Genet 18: 144152.Google Scholar
29.Slatis, HM, Reis, RM, Hoene, RE (1958): Consanguineous marriages in Chicago region. Am J Hum Genet 10: 446464.Google Scholar
30.Smith, CAB (1967): Note on the paper “Consanguineous marriages and genetic load due to lethal genes in Kerala.” Ann Hum Genet 31: 146147.Google Scholar
31.Smith, CAB (1969): Corrigenda. Ann Hum Genet 32: 419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Srikumari, CR, Rajani Kumari, J, Rao, TV (1985) Variability of genetic load with changing sociocultural environment. Hum Hered 35: 388393.Google Scholar