Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T14:24:57.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic diversity and differentiation of 12 eastern Adriatic and western Dinaric native sheep breeds using microsatellites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2014

D. Salamon ,
B. Gutierrez-Gil ,
J. J. Arranz ,
J. Barreta ,
V. Batinic  and
A. Dzidic
D. Salamon
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science I, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Svetošimunska cesta 25, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
B. Gutierrez-Gil
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Universidad de León, Campus de Vegazana s/n, 24071 León, Spain
J. J. Arranz
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Universidad de León, Campus de Vegazana s/n, 24071 León, Spain
J. Barreta
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Universidad de León, Campus de Vegazana s/n, 24071 León, Spain
V. Batinic
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Food Technology, University of Mostar, Biskupa Čule b.b., 88000 Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina
A. Dzidic*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science I, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Svetošimunska cesta 25, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
*
†E-mail: adzidic@agr.hr
Get access

Abstract

Nuclear genetic diversity and differentiation of 341 sheep belonging to 12 sheep breeds from Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina were examined. The aim of the study was to provide the understanding of the genetic structure and variability of the analysed pramenka sheep populations, and to give indications for conservation strategies based on the population diversity and structure information. The genetic variation of the sheep populations, examined at the nuclear level using 27 microsatellite loci, revealed considerable levels of genetic diversity, similar to the diversity found in other European indigenous low-production sheep breeds. Population-specific alleles were detected at most loci and in breeds analysed. The observed heterozygosity ranged from 0.643 (in Lika pramenka) to 0.743 (in Vlasic pramenka), and the expected heterozygosity ranged from 0.646 (in Lika pramenka) to 0.756 (in Dalmatian pramenka). Significant inbreeding coefficients were found for half of the populations studied and ranged from 0.040 (Pag island sheep) to 0.091 (Kupres pramenka). Moderate genetic differentiation was found between the studied sheep populations. The total genetic variability observed between different populations was 5.29%, whereas 94.71% of the variation was found within populations. Cres island sheep, Lika pramenka and Istrian sheep were identified as the most distinct populations, which was confirmed by the factorial analysis of correspondence and supported through a bootstrapping adjustment to correct for the difference in the sample sizes. The population structure analysis distinguished 12 clusters for the 12 sheep breeds analysed. However, the cluster differentiation was low for Dalmatian, Vlasic, Stolac and Krk pramenka. This systematic study identified Lika pramenka and Rab island sheep as those with the lowest diversity, whereas Istrian sheep and Pag island sheep had the highest. Conservation actions are proposed for Istrian, Rab and Cres island sheep, Lika and Kupres pramenka because of high estimated coefficients of inbreeding.

Keywords

sheep breedsgenetic diversitypopulation structuremicrosatellites
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , February 2014 , pp. 200 - 207
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

Arora, R, Bhatia, S, Mishra, BP and Joshi, BK 2011. Population structure in Indian sheep ascertained using microsatellite information. Animal Genetics 42, 242–250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arranz, JJ, Bayon, Y and San Primitivo, F 2001. Differentiation among Spanish sheep breeds using microsatellites. Genetics Selection Evolution 33, 529–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barreta, J, Iñiguez, V, Saavedra, V, Romero, F, Callisaya, AM, Echalar, J, Gutiérrez-Gil, B and Arranz, JJ 2012. Genetic diversity and population structure of Bolivian alpacas. Small Ruminant Research 105, 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumung, R, Simianer, H and Hoffmann, I 2004. Genetic diversity studies in farm animals – a survey. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 121, 361–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belkhir, K, Borsa, P, Chikhi, L, Raufaste, N and Bonhomme, F 2002. GENETIX 4.04, logiciel sous Windows TM pour la génétique des populations. Laboratoire Génome, Populations, Interactions: CNRS UMR 5000, Université de Montpellier II, Montpellier, France.Google Scholar
Böhm, O 2004. Sheep and goat husbandry in Primorje (the Slovenian litoral) between 1946 and 1952. Slovenian Veterinary Research 41, 95–123.Google Scholar
Bradic, M, Pavic, V and Mioc, B 2003. Genetic difference of some sheep breeds in the Republic of Croatia. In Book of Abstracts of the 54th Annual Meeeting of the European Association for Animal Production (ed. Y van der Honing), pp. 15. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bradic, M, Mioc, B, Pavic, V and Barac, Z 2005. Pairwise comparison of mtDNA sequences in two Croatian sheep populations. In Book of abstracts of the 56th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production (ed. Y van der Honing), pp. 97. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Brka, M, Muhamedagić, S, Ivanković, S, Vegara, M, Rahmanović, A, Dokso, A and Zečević, E 2007. Autochthones breeds of domestic animals in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In Proceedings of 1st Conference on Native Breeds and Plant Varieties as part of natural and cultural heritage,13 to 16 November 2007, Šibenik, Croatia, pp. 35–36.Google Scholar
Ćinkulov, M, Popovski, Z, Porcu, K, Tanaskovska, B, Hodžić, A, Bytyqi, H, Mehmeti, H, Margeta, V, Djedović, R, Hoda, A, Trailović, B, Brka, M, Marković, B, Važić, B, Vegara, M, Olsaker, I and Kantanen, J 2008. Genetic diversity and structure of the West Balkan Pramenka sheep types as revealed by microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA analysis. Animal Genetics 125, 417–426.Google ScholarPubMed
Dalvit, C, Sacca, E, Cassandro, M, Gervaso, M, Pastore, E and Piasentier, E 2008. Genetic diversity and variability in Alpine sheep breeds. Small Ruminant Research 80, 45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dent, AE and VonHoldt, BM 2012. STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conservation Genetic Resources 4, 359–361.Google Scholar
Draganescu, C and Grosu, H 2010. Valachian (Zackel) heritage philetic sheep group – a taxonomic problem. DAGENE. Retrieved May 24, 2012, from http://ebookbrowse.com/draganescu-and-grosu-dagene-2010-pdf-d58690637 Google Scholar
Excoffier, L, Laval, G and Schneider, S 2005. Arlequin ver.3.0: an integrated software package for population genetics analysis. Evolutionary Bioinformatics Online 1, 47–50.Google Scholar
Ferencakovic, M, Curik, I, Royo, LJ, Pérez-Pardal, L, Cubric-Curik, V, Fernández, I, Álvarez, I, Kostelic, A, Sprem, N, Krapinec, K and Goyache, F 2013. Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome diversity in East Adriatic sheep. Animal Genetics 44, 184–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2011. Molecular genetic characterization of animal genetic resources. FAO Animal production and health guidelines. No. 9. Commission on genetic resources for food and agriculture. FAO, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Galov, A, Byrne, K, Gomercic, T, Duras, L, Arbanasic, H, Sindicic, M, Mihelic, D, Kovacic, A and Funk, SM 2013. Genetic structure and admixture between the Posavina and Croatian Coldblood in contrast to Lipizzan horse from Croatia. Czech Journal of Animal Science 58, 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, SW and Thompson, EA 1992. Performing the exact test of Hardy–Weinberg proportion for multiple alleles. Biometrics 48, 361–372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutierrez, JP, Royo, LJ, Álvarez, I and Goyache, F 2005. MolKin v2.0: a computer program for genetic analysis of populations using molecular coancestry information. Journal of Heredity 96, 718–721.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutierrez-Gil, B, Uzun, M, Arranz, JJ, San Primitivo, F, Yildiz, S, Cenesiz, M and Bayon, Y 2006. Genetic diversity in Turkish sheep. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica A 56, 1–7.Google Scholar
Ivanković, A, Dovč, P, Kavar, T, Caput, P, Mioč, B, Pavić, V, Štuhec, V and Leto, J 2005. Genetic characterisation of the Pag island sheep breed based on microsatellite and mtDNA data. Small Ruminant Research 57, 167–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawson Handley, LJ, Byrne, K, Santucci, F, Townsend, S, Taylor, M, Bruford, MW and Hewitt, GM 2007. Genetic structure of European sheep breeds. Heredity 99, 620–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ligda, Ch, Altarayrah, J and Georgoudis, A and ECONOGENE 2009. Genetic analysis of Greek sheep breeds using microsatellite markers for setting conservation priorities. Small Ruminant Research 83, 42–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, PO and Zaykin, D 2001. Genetic data analysis: computer program for the analysis of allelic data, version 1.0 (d16c): 45pp. Retrieval January 24, 2012, from http://www.eeb.uconn.edu/people/plewis/software.php Google Scholar
Palian, B, Nikolic, T and Bagaric, D 1960. Results of commercial crossing with sheep under extensive conditions of nutrition. Stocarstvo 14, 426–433.Google Scholar
Pariset, L, Savarese, MC, Cappuccio, I and Valentini, A 2003. Use of microsatellites for genetic variation and inbreeding analysis in Sarda sheep flocks of central Italy. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 120, 425–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavić, V, Bradić, M, Mioč, B, Ivanković, A, Barać, Z and Safner, T 2006. Use of molecular markers in sheep genotyping. In Proceedings of 41st Croatian and 1st International Symposium on Agriculture (ed. S Jovanovac and V Kovačevič), pp. 639–640. Faculty of Agriculture in Osijek, Osijek, Croatia.Google Scholar
Posavi, M, Ernoić, M, Ozimec, R and Poljak, F 2003. Enciklopedija hrvatskih domaćih životinja. Katarina Zrinski, Varaždin, Croatia.Google Scholar
Pritchard, JK, Steephens, M and Donnelly, P 2000. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raymond, M and Rousset, F 1995. GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. Journal of Heredity 86, 248–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salamon, D, Gutierrez-Gil, B, Kostelic, A, Gorjanc, G, Kompan, D and Dzidic, A 2012. Preliminary study on the genetic diversity of the Istrian sheep, Lika and Krk pramenka sheep populations using microsatellite markers. Acta Agriculturae Slovenica 100, 125–129.Google Scholar
Santos-Silva, F, Ivo, RS, Suosa, MCO, Carolino, MI, Ginja, C and Gama, LT 2008. Assessing genetic diversity and differentiation in Portugese coarse-wool sheep breeds with microsatellite markers. Small Ruminant Research 78, 32–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tapio, I, Tapio, M, Grislis, Z, Holm, LE, Jeppsson, S, Kantanen, J, Miceikiene, I, Olsaker, I, Viinalass, H and Eythórsdóttir, E 2005. Unfolding of population structure in Baltic sheep breeds using microsatellite analysis. Heredity 2005, 1–9.Google Scholar
Tapio, M, Ozerov, M, Tapio, I, Toro, MA, Marzanov, N, Ćinkulov, M, Goncharenko, G, Kiselyova, T, Murawski, M and Kantanen, J 2010. Microsatellite-based genetic diversity and population structure of domestic sheep in northern Eurasia. BMC Genetics 11, 76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: Image

Salamon et al. supplementary material

Figure 1

Download Salamon et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 5.5 MB
Supplementary material: Image

Salamon et al. supplementary material

Figure 2

Download Salamon et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 3.7 MB
Supplementary material: Image

Salamon et al. supplementary material

Figure 3

Download Salamon et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 778.3 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Salamon et al. supplementary material

Figure 4

Download Salamon et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 2.3 MB
Supplementary material: File

Salamon et al. supplementary material

Supplementary tables

Download Salamon et al. supplementary material(File)
File 97.8 KB