Genetic relationships among four Turkish sheep breeds using microsatellites

Objective & Hypothesis:The genetic structure of 4 Turkish breeds of sheep, Gökçeada, Kıvırcık, Karacabey Merino, and Sakız (SZ), was analyzed by genotyping with 17 microsatellite markers in 250 individuals.

📊

Key Findings & Data:The microsatellites showed high levels of polymorphism, with means for total and effective number of alleles per locus of 20.71 and 7.04, respectively.

💡

Conclusion & Impact:It was found that a higher level of breed admixture existed in the 4 breeds, which was an important finding.

🔬Design:Research Article

📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample

⚙️Variables:Genetic diversity · microsatellite · sheep

Abstract

The genetic structure of 4 Turkish breeds of sheep, Gökçeada, Kıvırcık, Karacabey Merino, and Sakız (SZ), was analyzed by genotyping with 17 microsatellite markers in 250 individuals. The microsatellites showed high levels of polymorphism, with means for total and effective number of alleles per locus of 20.71 and 7.04, respectively. The average observed and expected heterozygosity values were 0.66 and 0.87, respectively. It was found that a higher level of breed admixture existed in the 4 breeds, which was an important finding. It was also found that 7.9% of genetic variation resulted from difference between the populations, whereas 92.1% resulted from difference between individuals. Our results showed that the used microsatellite markers were adequately polymorphic and can be successfully used for investigating genetic diversity in the 4 breeds studied. The genetic variation in Turkish breeds was not significantly higher than that of European breeds, which might be a consequence of the recent sharp decrease in sheep numbers.

Özet

The genetic structure of 4 Turkish breeds of sheep, Gökçeada, Kıvırcık, Karacabey Merino, and Sakız (SZ), was analyzed by genotyping with 17 microsatellite markers in 250 individuals. The microsatellites showed high levels of polymorphism, with means for total and effective number of alleles per locus of 20.71 and 7.04, respectively. The average observed and expected heterozygosity values were 0.66 and 0.87, respectively. It was found that a higher level of breed admixture existed in the 4 breeds, which was an important finding. It was also found that 7.9% of genetic variation resulted from difference between the populations, whereas 92.1% resulted from difference between individuals. Our results showed that the used microsatellite markers were adequately polymorphic and can be successfully used for investigating genetic diversity in the 4 breeds studied. The genetic variation in Turkish breeds was not significantly higher than that of European breeds, which might be a consequence of the recent sharp decrease in sheep numbers.

Keywords

Genetic diversity microsatellite sheep native sheep breeds

🔖

Cite This Article

YILMAZ, O., SEZENLER, T., SEVİM, S., CEMAL, İ., KARACA, O., YAMAN, Y., KARADAĞ, O. (2015). Genetic relationships among four Turkish sheep breeds using microsatellites. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 5, 576–582. https://ajindex.com/articles/121424

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

Open in New Tab ↗

↗New Tab

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

Koban E. Genetic diversity of native and crossbreed sheep breeds in Anatolia. PhD. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, 2004.
Zeder, MA Domestication and early agriculture in the Mediterranean basin: origins, diffusion, and impact. P Natl Acad Sci 2008; 105: 11597–11604. General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policy. Domestic Animal Genetic Resources in Turkey. Ankara, Turkey: Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Livestock; 2011.
Karaca O, Cemal İ, Yılmaz O, Yılmaz M. Karya koyunu. In: Türkiye Ulusal Koyunculuk Kongresi. İzmir, Turkey: Ege University; 2009. pp. 225–234 (in Turkish). Bruford MW, Chessman DJ, Coote T, Gren HAA, Haines SA, O’Ryan C, Williams TR. Microsatellites and Their Application to Conservation Genetics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1996. FAO. Molecular Genetic Characterization of Animal Genetic Resources. Rome, Italy: Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations; 2011. 7. Peakall R, Smouse PE. GENALEX 6: Genetic Analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol Ecol Notes 2006; 6: 288–295.
Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S. Arlequin (version 3.0): An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol Bioinform 2005; 1: 47–50.
Tamura K, Dudley J, Nei M, Kumar S. MEGA4: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) software version 4.0. Mol Biol Evol 2007; 24: 1596–1599. Nei M. Genetic distance between populations. Am Nat 1972; 106: 283–292.
Weir BS, Cockerham CC. Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 1984; 38: 1358–1370.
Yeh FC, Yang RC, Boyle TBJ, Ye ZH, Mao JX. POPGENE: The User-Friendly Shareware for Population Genetic Analysis. Edmonton, AB, Canada: University of Alberta; 1997. Goudet J. FSTAT (Version 2.9.3.). A Program to Estimate and Test Gene Diversities and Fixation Indices. Lausanne, Switzerland: University of Lausanne; 2001.
Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 2000; 155: 945–959.
Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 2005; 14: 2611–2620.
Arora RJ, Bhatia S, Mishra BP, Jain A, Prakash B. Diversity analysis of sheep breeds from Southern peninsular and Eastern regions of India. Trop Anim Health Pro 2011; 43: 401–408.
Arora R, Bhatia S. Genetic structure of Muzzafarnagri sheep based on microsatellite analysis. Small Ruminant Res 2