Microsatellite diversity in the populations of Ukrainian local chicken breeds
The article considers the questions about microsatellite diversity in the populations of Birkivska Barvista (line A), White Plymouth Rock (line G-2), Poltava clay (line 14) and Rhode Island Red (line 38) chicken breeds. Using the classical PCR method, populations polymorphism was studied for 14 microsatellite loci (LEI0094, LEI0166, LEI0192, ADL0268, ADL0278, MCW0034, MCW0081, MCW0104, MCW0123, MCW0330, MCW0245, MCW0257, MCW0282, MCW0288). For all microsatellite loci 66 alleles were detected. For the population of White Plymouth Rock chicken breed, the number of individual alleles in all the loci was 64; for Birkivska Barvista – 50; for Rhode Island Red – 50; for Poltava clay – 52. By the values of the polymorphism information content (PIC), the number of highly informative markers was ~ 45% of the total. According to the results of the research, it was revealed that the biggest genetic differences were between the White Plymouth Rock and Rhode Island Red chicken breeds (65.9% of differences), the smallest were between White Plymouth Rock and Poltava clay chicken breeds (32.3%). Between lines 14 and 38 (the egg-meat direction of productivity), 35.9% of the differences were observed. By comparison of the population of Borkovskaya Barvistaya chicken breed (line A), the maximum differences were found with the Rhode Island Red (58.8%), while the G-2 and 14 lines showed similar differences (32.8 and 37.9%). According to Wright's F-statistics analysis, 19.5% of detected genetic variability was between populations that indicating a significant divergence of the experimental chicken lines. Among all studied loci, the average level of divergence (the value of Fst was within the range of 0.06–0.15) is characteristic for 29% of the total number of microsatellite markers; strongly expressed divergence (0.16–0.25) for 57% and very strong (> 0.25) for 14% (locus MCW0257 and MCW0288). By averaged values of Fis, negative values (excess of heterozygotes) were shown only for 3 from all studied loci. The average Fit value indicates a significant (27.5%) excess of homozygous individuals what indicates the high level of inbreeding in experimental chicken populations and reaches its maximum value in the MCW0245 and MCW0257 loci.
Khlestkina, E.K. (2014). Molecular markers in genetic studies and breeding. Russian Journal of Genetics: Applied Research. 4(3), 236–244. doi: 10.1134/S2079059714030022.
Gholizadeh, M., & Mianji, G.R. (2007). Use of microsatellite markers in poultry research. International Journal of Poultry Science. 6(2), 145–153. doi: 10.3923/ijps.2007.145.153.
Tadano, R., & Kataoka, Y. (2014). Genetic diversity in a small chicken population inferred from microsatellite polymorphism. The Journal of Poultry Science. 51(3), 242–247. doi: 10.2141/jpsa.0130141.
Nassar, F.S., Moghaieb, R.E.A., & Abdou, A.M. (2012). Microsatellite markers associated with body and carcass weights in broiler breeders. African Journal of Biotechnology. 11(15), 3514–3521. doi: 10.5897/AJB11.3721.
Puja, I.K., Sumarjaya, I.N.T.O., Sudarsana, I.W. et al. (2015). Genetic Characteristics of Four Microsatellite Markers Associated with Birth Weight in Bali Cattle. Global Veterinaria. 14(5), 633–637. http://erepo.unud.ac.id/id/eprint/425.
Van Tassell, C.P., Ashwell, M.S., & Sonstegard, T.S. (2000). Detection of putative loci affecting milk, health, and conformation traits in a US Holstein population using 105 microsatellite markers. Journal of Dairy Science. 83(8), 1865–1872. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(00)75058-2.
McElroy, J.P., Dekkers, J.C., Fulton, J.E. et al. (2005). Microsatellite Markers Associated with Resistance to Marek’s Disease in Commercial Layer Chickens. Poultry Science. 84(11), 1678–1688. doi: 10.1093/ps/84.11.1678.
Kurzawski, G., Suchy, J., & Debniak, T. (2004). Importance of microsatellite instability (MSI) in colorectal cancer: MSI as a diagnostic tool. Annals of Oncology. 15(4), 283–284. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdh940.
Salipante, S.J., Scroggins, S.M., & Hampel, H.L. (2014). Microsatellite instability detection by next generation sequencing. Clinical Chemistry. 60(9), 1192–1199. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2014.223677.
Tadano, R., Sekino, M., Nishibori, M., & Tsudzuki, M. (2007). Microsatellite marker analysis for the genetic relationships among japanese long-tailed chicken breeds. Poultry Science. 86, 460–469. doi: 10.1093/ps/86.3.460.
Fathi, M.M., Al-Homidan, I., Motawei, M.I., Abou-Emera, O.K., & El-Zarei, M.F. (2017). Evaluation of genetic diversity of Saudi native chicken populations using microsatellite markers. Poultry science. 96(3), 530–536. doi: 10.3382/ps/pew357.
Romanov, M.N., & Weigend, S. (2001). Analysis of genetic relationships between various populations of domestic and jungle fowl using microsatellite markers. Poultry science. 80(8), 1057–1063. doi: 10.1093/ps/80.8.1057.
FAO (2011). Molecular genetic characterization of animal genetic resources. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Publ., Rome, Italy. doi: 10.1017/S2078633611000609.
Heifetz, E.M., Fulton, J.E., O'Sullivan, N.P. et al. (2009). Mapping QTL affecting resistance to Marek's disease in an F6 advanced intercross population of commercial layer chickens. BMC Genomics. 10:20. – Published online 2009 Jan 14. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-10-20.
Merkur’eva, E.K. (1977). Geneticheskie osnovy selektsii v skotovodstve [Genetic Bases of Breeding in Ranching]. M.: Kolos (in Russian).
Shete, S., Tiwari, H., & Elston, R.C. (2000). On Estimating the Heterozygosity and Polymorphism Information Content Value. Theoretical Population Biology. 57, 265–271. doi: 10.1006/tpbi.2000.1452.
Nei, M., & Chesser, R.K. (1983). Estimation of fixation indices and gene diversities. Ann. Hum. Genet. 47(3), 253–259. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.1983.tb00993.x.
Kuznecov, V.M. (2014). F-statystyky rajta: ocenka і іnterpretacіja. Nauchno-teoretycheskіj zhurnal «Problemy bіologhіі produktyvnykh zhyvotnykh». 4, 80–104 (in Russian).
Wright, S. (1978). Evolution and the genetics of populations. Vol. 4. Variability within and among natural populations. Univ. Chicago. http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/E/bo3642015.html.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.