Animal Bioscience

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

DOI QR Code

Development of novel microsatellite markers to analyze the genetic structure of dog populations in Taiwan

  • Lai, Fang-Yu (Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Bioresources, Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bioresources and Agriculture, National Taiwan University) ;
  • Lin, Yu-Chen (Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Bioresources, Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bioresources and Agriculture, National Taiwan University) ;
  • Ding, Shih-Torng (Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Bioresources, Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bioresources and Agriculture, National Taiwan University) ;
  • Chang, Chi-Sheng (Department of Animal Science, Chinese Culture University) ;
  • Chao, Wi-Lin (Department of Animal Industry, Council of Agriculture) ;
  • Wang, Pei-Hwa (Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Bioresources, Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bioresources and Agriculture, National Taiwan University)
  • Received : 2021.11.26
  • Accepted : 2022.02.16
  • Published : 2022.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: Alongside the rise of animal-protection awareness in Taiwan, the public has been paying more attention to dog genetic deficiencies due to inbreeding in the pet market. The goal of this study was to isolate novel microsatellite markers for monitoring the genetic structure of domestic dog populations in Taiwan. Methods: A total of 113 DNA samples from three dog breeds-beagles (BEs), bichons (BIs), and schnauzers (SCs)-were used in subsequent polymorphic tests applying the 14 novel microsatellite markers that were isolated in this study. Results: The results showed that the high level of genetic diversity observed in these novel microsatellite markers provided strong discriminatory power. The estimated probability of identity (P(ID)) and the probability of identity among sibs (P(ID)sib) for the 14 novel microsatellite markers were 1.7×10-12 and 1.6×10-5, respectively. Furthermore, the power of exclusion for the 14 novel microsatellite markers was 99.98%. The neighbor-joining trees constructed among the three breeds indicated that the 14 sets of novel microsatellite markers were sufficient to correctly cluster the BEs, BIs, and SCs. The principal coordinate analysis plot showed that the dogs could be accurately separated by these 14 loci based on different breeds; moreover, the Beagles from different sources were also distinguished. The first, the second, and the third principal coordinates could be used to explain 44.15%, 26.35%, and 19.97% of the genetic variation. Conclusion: The results of this study could enable powerful monitoring of the genetic structure of domestic dog populations in Taiwan.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was financially supported by the Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan, Taiwan (Grant No.: 2012 AS-2.1.9-AD-U1 and 2013 AS-2.1.9-AD-U1) in Taiwan.We would like to acknowledge the National Center for Genome Medicine (NCGM), National Science Council, Taiwan, for their technical support with microsatellite markers.

References

  1. Streitberger K, Schweizer M, Kropatsch R, et al. Rapid genetic diversification within dog breeds as evidenced by a case study on Schnauzers. Anim Genet 2012;43:577-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2011.02300.x
  2. Whitehouse-Tedd K, Richards N, Parker M. Dogs and Conservation: emerging themes and considerations. J Vertebr Biol 2021;69:E2004.1-4. https://doi.org/10.25225/jvb.E2004
  3. Ottesen JL, Weber A, Gurtler H, Mikkelsen LF. New housing conditions: improving the welfare of experimental animals. Altern Lab Anim 2004;32(Suppl 1B):397-404. https://doi.org/10.1177/026119290403201s65
  4. Lust G. An overview of the pathogenesis of canine hip dysplasia. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1997;210:1443-5.
  5. Rooney N. Sargan D. Pedigree dog breeding in the UK: A major welfare concern? [cited 2021 July 19]. Horsham, UK: Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; 2009. Available from: https://www.rspca.org.uk/webContent/staticImages/Downloads/PedigreeDogsReport.pdf
  6. Chia R, Achilli F, Festing MFW, Fisher EMC. The origins and uses of mouse outbred stocks. Nat Genet 2005;37:1181-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1665
  7. The Kennel Club. Getting a dog. [cited 2021 July 21]. Available from: http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk
  8. Lindblad-Toh K, Wade CM, Mikkelsen TS, et al. Genome sequence, comparative analysis and haplotype structure of the domestic dog. Nature 2005;438:803-19. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04338
  9. Ostrander EA, Mapa FA, Yee M, Rine J. One hundred and one new simple sequence repeat-based markers for the canine genome. Mamm Genome 1995;6:192-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00293011
  10. Dvorak J, Halverson J, Stevenson T. Microsatellite sequences for canine genotyping. Washington, DC, USA: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; 1999. U.S. Patent No. 5874217.
  11. Ichikawa Y, Takagi K, Tsumagari S, et al. Canine parentage testing based on microsatellite polymorphism. J Vet Med Sci 2001;63:1209-13. https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.63.1209
  12. Irion DN, Schaffer AL, Famula TR, Eggleston ML, Hughes SS, Pedersen NC. Analysis of genetic variation in 28 dog breed populations with 100 microsatellite markers. J Hered 2003;94:81-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esg004
  13. Wictum E, Kun T, Lindquist C, Malvick J, Vankan D, Sacks B. Developmental validation of DogFiler, a novel multiplex for canine DNA profiling in forensic casework. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2013;7:82-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2012.07.001
  14. van Hooft WF, Hanotte O, Wenink PW, et al. Applicability of bovine microsatellite markers for population genetic studies on African buffalo (Syncerus caffer). Anim Genet 1999;30: 214-20. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2052.1999.00453.x
  15. Glenn TC, Schable NA. Isolating microsatellite DNA loci. Methods Enzymol 2005;395:202-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(05)95013-1
  16. Schuelke M. An economic method for the fluorescent labeling of PCR fragments. Nat Biotechnol 2000;18:233-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/72708
  17. Raymond M, Rousset F. GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J Hered 1995;86:248-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a111573
  18. Saitou N, Nei M. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 1987;4: 406-25. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040454
  19. Dieringer D, Schlotterer C. Microsatellite analyser (MSA): a platform independent analysis tool for large microsatellite data sets. Mol Ecol 2003;3:167-9. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-8286.2003.00351.x
  20. Felsenstein J. Phylogeny Inference Package (PHYLIP) [Inter-net]. Genomes Sciences, Department of Genetics, Seattle, WA, USA: Washington University; 2002. Available from: http://evolution.gs.washington.edu/phylip.html
  21. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 1985;39:783-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb00420.x
  22. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 2000;155: 945-59. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/155.2.945
  23. Peakall R, Smouse PE. GenAlEx ver6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research - an update. Bioinformatics 2012;28:2537-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts460
  24. Waits LP, Luikart G, Taberlet P. Estimating the probability of identity among genotypes in natural populations: cautions and guidelines. Mol Ecol 2001;10:249-56. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-294X.2001.01185.x
  25. Jamieson A. The genetics of transferrins in cattle. Heredity 1965;20:419-41. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1965.54
  26. Fonteque GV, Battilana J, Paludo E, Lima-Rosa CADV. Genetic polymorphism of fifteen microsatellite loci in Brazilian (blueegg Caipira) chickens. Pesq Vet Bras 2014;34:98-102. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-736X2014000100016
  27. Agha SH, Pilla F, Galal S, et al. Genetic diversity in Egyptian and Italian goat breeds measured with microsatellite polymorphism. J Anim Breed Genet 2008;125:194-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0388.2008.00730.x
  28. Radko A, Rubis D, Szumiec A. Analysis of microsatellite DNA polymorphism in the Tatra Shepherd Dog. J Appl Anim Res 2018;46:254-6. https://doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2017.1292912
  29. Radko A, Podbielska A. Microsatellite dna analysis of genetic diversity and parentage testing in the popular dog breeds in Poland. Genes 2021;12:485. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes12040485
  30. Barker JSF. A global protocol for determining genetic distances among domestic livestock breeds. Proc 5th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production; 1994. Vol. 21 pp. 501-8.
  31. Wright S. Evolution and genetics of populations. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago; 1978.
  32. Kang BT, Kim KS, Min MS, et al. Microsatellite loci analysis for the genetic variability and the parentage test of five dog breeds in South Korea. Genes Genet Syst 2009;84:245-51. https://doi.org/10.1266/ggs.84.245
  33. Hau J, Schapiro SJ. Handbook of laboratory animal science. In: Festing MFW, Lutz C, editors. Laboratory animal genetics and genetic quality control. 3rd ed. Boca, Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press; 2010. pp. 209-50.
  34. Efron B, Halloran E, Holmes S. Bootstrap confidence levels for phylogenetic trees. Proc Natl Acad Sci (USA) 1996;93: 7085-90. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.14.7085
  35. Barry GH. Phylogenetic trees made easy: a how-to manual. 3rd ed., Sunderland, MA, USA: Sinauer Assoc. Inc., 2007.
  36. Animal Protection Information Network. Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan c2019 [cited 2021 July 22]. Available from: https://animal.coa.gov.tw/Frontend/Know/Detail/LT00000559?parentID=Tab0000004
  37. DeNise S, Johnston E, Halverson J, et al. Power of exclusion for parentage verification and probability of match for identity in American Kennel Club breeds using 17 canine microsatellite markers. Anim Genet 2004;35:14-7. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2052.2003.01074.x
  38. Eichmann C, Berger B, Steinlechner M, Parson W. Estimating the probability of identity in a random dog population using 15 highly polymorphic canine STR markers. Forensic Sci Int 2005;151:37-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.07.002