Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Microsatellite-based Genetic Diversity and Evolutionary Relationships of Six Dog Breeds

  • Ye, J.-H. (Ministry of Public Security, Police Dog Base in Nanchang) ;
  • Ren, D.-R. (College of Animal Science and Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University) ;
  • Xie, A.-F. (Graduate School of Jiangxi Normal University) ;
  • Wu, X.-P. (Nanchang University) ;
  • Xu, L. (Ministry of Public Security, Police Dog Base in Nanchang) ;
  • Fu, P.-F. (Ministry of Public Security, Police Dog Base in Nanchang) ;
  • Zhao, H.-A. (Jiangxi Forensic Science Institute) ;
  • Yang, Qianyong (Ministry of Public Security, Police Dog Base in Nanchang)
  • Received : 2008.09.03
  • Accepted : 2009.02.02
  • Published : 2009.08.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The Tibetan Mastiff is one of the most archaic, ferocious and the largest dogs in the world. The Kunming dog is the chief working-dog breed in China. In this study, ten microsatellite loci were used to assess the genetic diversity and evolutionary relationships in six dog breeds, including Tibetan Mastiff, Kunming dog, Belgian Malinois, Labrador Retriever, English Springer Spaniel, and German Shepherd. The highest genetic diversity was exhibited by the Tibetan Mastiff, indicating useful protection and little inbreeding in the modern Tibetan Mastiff. Higher genetic diversity was observed in European breeds, supporting the hypotheses that breeders outcross their pure breed dogs occasionally to avoid deleterious effects in Europe. Evolutionary relationships showed that English Springer Spaniel and Labrador Retriever were clustered together, then with the Tibetan Mastiff, consistent with previous cluster results. German Shepherd and Kunming dog were grouped together, coinciding with the breeding history of Kunming dog. It is the first time that Tibetan Mastiff and Kunming dog have been analyzed with microsatellites.

Keywords

References

  1. Botsein, D., R. L. White, M. Skolnick and R. W. Davies. 1980. Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction length polymorphism. Am. J. Hum Genetic. 32:314-331 https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI112086
  2. Bruford, M. W. 2004. Conservation genetics of UK livestock: from molecules to management. In: Farm animal genetic resources (Ed. G. Simm, B. Villanueva and S. Townsend). Nottingham University Press, UK. pp. 151-169
  3. Chang, G. B., H. Chang, X. P. Liu, W. M. Zhao, D. J. Ji, Y. J. Mao, G. M. Song and X. K. Shi. 2007. Genetic diversity of wild quail in China ascertained with microsatellite DNA markers. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 20:1783-1790 https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2007.1783
  4. Dennis-Bryan, K. and J. Clutton-Brock. 1988. Dogs of the last hundred years at the British Museum (Natural History ). London: British Museum (Natural History)
  5. DeNise, S., E. Johnston, J. Halverson, K. Marshall, D. Rosenfeld, S. McKenna, T. Sharpand and J. Edwards. 2004. Power of exclusion for parentage verification and probability of match for identity in A merican kennel club breeds using 17 canine microsatellite markers. Anim. Genet. 35:14-17 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2052.2003.01074.x
  6. Felsenstein, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783-791 https://doi.org/10.2307/2408678
  7. Guardamagna, A. 1995. Le chien de Montagne des Pyr$\acute{e}$n$\acute{e}$es. Ed.de Vecchi, Paris. p. 161
  8. Hollingsworth, P. M. and R. A. Ennos. 2004. Neighbour joining trees, dominant markers and population genetic structure. Heredity 92:490-498 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.hdy.6800445
  9. Ichikawa, Y., K. Takagi, S. Tsumagari, K. Ishihama, M. Morita, M. Kanemaki, M. Takeishi and H. Takahashi. 2001. Canine parentage testing based on microsatellite polymorphisms. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 63:1209-1213 https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.63.1209
  10. Irion, D. N., A. L. Schaffer, T. R. Famula, M. L. Eggleston, S. S. Hughes and N. C. Pedersen. 2003. Analysis of genetic variation in 28 dog breed populations with 100 microsatellite markers. J. Hered. 94:81-87 https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esg004
  11. Kim, K. S., Y. Tanabe, C. K. Park and J. H. Ha. 2001. Genetic variability in east Asian dogs using microsatellite loci analysis. J. Hered. 92:398-403 https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/92.5.398
  12. Koskinen, M. T. 2003. Individual assignment using microsatellite DNA reveals unambiguous breed identification in the domestic dog. Anim. Genet. 34:297-301 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2052.2003.01005.x
  13. Koskinen, M. T. and P. Bredbacka. 2000. Assessment of the population structure of five Finnish dog breeds with microsatellites. Anim. Genet. 31:310-317 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2052.2000.00669.x
  14. Nagamine, Y. and M. Higuchi. 2001. Genetic distance and classification of domestic animals using genetic markers. J. Anim. Breed Genet. 118:101-109 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0388.2001.00276.x
  15. Nei, M. 1978. Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small number of individuals. Genetics 89:583-590 https://doi.org/10.1051/gse:2002019
  16. Nei, M., F. Tajima and Y. Tateno. 1983. Accuracy of estimation phylogenetic trees from molecular data. J. Mol. Evol. 19:153-170 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300753
  17. Ostrander, E. A. and R. K. Wayne. 2005. The canine genome. Genome Res. 15:1706-1716 https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.3736605
  18. Parker, H. G., L. V. Kim, N. B. Sutter, S. Carlson, T. D. Lorentzen, T. B. Malek, G. S. Johnson, H. B. DeFrance, E. A. Ostrander and L. Kruglyak. 2004. Genetic structure of the purebred domestic dog. Science 304:1160-1164 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097406
  19. Puja, I. K., D. N. Irion, A. L. Schaffer and N. C. Pedersen. 2005. The Kintamani dog: Genetic profile of an emerging breed from Bali, Indonesia. J. Hered. 96:854-859 https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esi067
  20. Sablin, M. V. and G. A. Khlopachev. 2002. The earliest ice age dogs: evidence from Eliseevichi. Curr Anthropol. 43:795-799 https://doi.org/10.1086/344372
  21. Savolainen, P., Y. P. Zhang, J. Luo, J. Lundeberg and T. Leitner. 2002. Genetic evidence for an East Asian origin of domestic dogs. Science 298:1610-1613 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1073906
  22. Sharma, D. K., J. E. Maldonado, Y. V. Jhala and R. C. Fleischer. 2004. Ancient wolf lineages in India. Proc. Biol. Sci. (Suppl 3) 271:S1-S4 https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2003.0071
  23. Sundqvist, A.-K., S. Bj$\ddot{o}$rnerfeldt, J. A. Leonard, F. Hailer, A. Hedhammar, H. Ellegren and C. Vil$\acute{a}$. 2006. Unequal contribution of sexes in the origin of dog breeds. Genetics 172:1121-1128 https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.105.042358
  24. Swofford, D. L. 2002. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (and Other methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts
  25. Ubbink, G. J., B. W. Knol and J. Bouw. 1992. The relationship between homozygosity and the occurrence of specific diseases in the Bouvier Belge Flanders dogs in the Netherlandsinbreeding and disease in the Bluvier dog. Vet Q. 14:137-140
  26. Vil$\acute{a}$, C., P. Savolainen, J. E. Maldonado, I. R. Amorim, J. E. Rice, R. L. Honneycutt, K. A. Crandall, J. Lundeberg and R. K. Wayne. 1997. Multiple and ancient origins of the domestic dog. Science 276:1687-1689 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.276.5319.1687
  27. Wu Yan, Xiao-Lin Liu, Shui-Sheng Hou and Wei Huang. 2008. Study on genetic diversity of six duck populations with microsatellite DNA. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 21:776-783 https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2008.70367

Cited by

  1. High genetic diversity of Tibetan Mastiffs revealed by mtDNA sequences vol.57, pp.13, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-012-4995-4