Genetic variability among native dog breeds in Turkey

Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the genetic structures and relationships of native Turkish dog breeds were investigated using 20 polymorphic loci (17 microsatellites and 3 proteins).

📊

Key Findings & Data:For this aim, a total of 141 blood samples were taken from Turkish shepherd dogs and Turkish Greyhounds located in several geographical regions of Turkey.

💡

Conclusion & Impact:Therefore, the generalised grouping of Turkish shepherd dogs into a single breed called Anatolian or Turkish shepherd dogs is incorrect.

🔬Design:Research Article

📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample

⚙️Variables:Key words: Turkish dog breeds · microsatellite · F-statistics

Abstract

In this study, the genetic structures and relationships of native Turkish dog breeds were investigated using 20 polymorphic loci (17 microsatellites and 3 proteins). For this aim, a total of 141 blood samples were taken from Turkish shepherd dogs and Turkish Greyhounds located in several geographical regions of Turkey. Multilocus FST values indicated that around 1.92% of the total genetic variation could be explained by breed differences and the remaining 98.08% by differences among individuals. The gene flow between populations within each generation varied between 8.4 (Akbash-White Kars Shepherd dog pairs) and 62.3 (Black-Grey Kars Shepherd dog pairs). Four different groups appeared in the 3-dimensional factorial correspondence analysis, and among these, dogs from the Akbash, Kangal, Kars Shepherd, and Turkish Greyhound breeds grouped in clearly separated clusters in distant parts of the 3-dimensional graph. These results clearly show that Akbash and Kangal Shepherd dogs are different populations with different genetic structures. Therefore, the generalised grouping of Turkish shepherd dogs into a single breed called Anatolian or Turkish shepherd dogs is incorrect.

Özet

In this study, the genetic structures and relationships of native Turkish dog breeds were investigated using 20 polymorphic loci (17 microsatellites and 3 proteins). For this aim, a total of 141 blood samples were taken from Turkish shepherd dogs and Turkish Greyhounds located in several geographical regions of Turkey. Multilocus FST values indicated that around 1.92% of the total genetic variation could be explained by breed differences and the remaining 98.08% by differences among individuals. The gene flow between populations within each generation varied between 8.4 (Akbash-White Kars Shepherd dog pairs) and 62.3 (Black-Grey Kars Shepherd dog pairs). Four different groups appeared in the 3-dimensional factorial correspondence analysis, and among these, dogs from the Akbash, Kangal, Kars Shepherd, and Turkish Greyhound breeds grouped in clearly separated clusters in distant parts of the 3-dimensional graph. These results clearly show that Akbash and Kangal Shepherd dogs are different populations with different genetic structures. Therefore, the generalised grouping of Turkish shepherd dogs into a single breed called Anatolian or Turkish shepherd dogs is incorrect.

Keywords

Key words: Turkish dog breeds microsatellite F-statistics genetic variability factorial correspondence analysis genetic distance

🔖

Cite This Article

ERDOĞAN, M., TEPELİ, C., BRENIG, B., AKBULUT, M. D., UĞUZ, C., SAVOLAINEN, P., ÖZBEYAZ, C. (2013). Genetic variability among native dog breeds in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Biology, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 2, 176–183. https://ajindex.com/articles/182532

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

Open in New Tab ↗

↗New Tab

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

Clutton-Brock J. Evolution of domesticated animals. In: Mason IL. ed. Dog. Longman; 1984: pp. 198–211. Zeder MA. Domestication and early agriculture in the Mediterranean basin: origins, diffusion, and impact. P Natl Acad Sci-Biol 105: 11597–11604, 2008.
Sablin MV, Khlopachev GA. The earliest ice age dogs: evidence from Eliseevichi I. Curr Anthropol 43: 795–799, 2002.
Napierala H, Uerpmann HP. A ‘new’ palaeolithic dog from Central Europe. Int J Osteoarchaeol 22: 127–137, 2010.
Fiennes R, Fiennes A. The Natural History of the Dog. Wedenfeld & Nicolson Press. London; 1968.
Savolainen P, Zhang Y, Luo J et al. Genetic evidence for an East Asian origin of domestic dogs. Science 298: 1610–1613, 2002. vonHoldt BM, Pollinger JP, Lohmueller KE et al. Genome-wide SNP and haplotype analyses reveal a rich history underlying dog domestication. Nature 464: 898–902, 2010.
Pang JF, Kluetsch C, Zou XJ et al. mtDNA data indicate a single origin for dogs south of Yangtze River, less than 16,300 years ago, from numerous wolves. Mol Biol Evol 26: 2849–2864, 200 Ding ZL, Oskarsson M, Ardalan A et al. Origins of domestic dog in Southern East Asia is supported by analysis of Y-chromosome DNA. Heredity 108: 507–514, 2012.
Ardalan A, Kluetsch CFC, Zhang A et al. Comprehensive study of mtDNA among Southwest Asian dogs contradicts independent domestication of wolf, but implies dog–wolf hybridization. Ecology and Evolution 3: 373–385, 2011. Kırmızı E. Türk çoban köpeklerinin tarihçesi. Türk Veteriner Hekimliği Dergisi 6: 39–41, 1994. Nelson DD. A general classification of the native dogs of Turkey. In: The International Symposium on Turkish Shepherd Dogs, Selçuk University, Konya, Turkey; 1996: pp. 19–94. Özbeyaz C. Kangal köpeklerinde bazı morfolojik özellikler. Lalahan Hayvancılık Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi 34: 38–46, 19 Reed S. The history of Turkish shepherd dogs. In: The International Symposium on Turkish Shepherd Dogs, Selçuk University, Konya, Turkey; 1996: pp. 97–109.
Erdoğan M, Özbeyaz C. Investigation of blood protein polymorphism and estimation of genetic distances in some dog breeds in Turkey. Turk J Vet Anim Sci 28: 583–590, 2004.
Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T. Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Press.
Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA; 1989. Nei M. Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. Columbia University Press. New York; 1987.
Weir BS, Cockerham CC. Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38: 1358–1370, 1984. Hartl D