Literature DB >> 22246407

A comparison of strategies for selecting breeding pairs to maximize genetic diversity retention in managed populations.

Jamie A Ivy1, Robert C Lacy.   

Abstract

Captive breeding programs aim to maintain populations that are demographically self-sustaining and genetically healthy. It has been well documented that the best way for managed breeding programs to retain gene diversity (GD) and limit inbreeding is to select breeding pairs that minimize a population's average kinship. We used a series of computer simulations to test 4 methods of minimizing average kinship across a variety of scenarios with varying generation lengths, mortality rates, reproductive rates, and rates of breeding pair success. "Static MK Selection" and "Dynamic MK Selection" are 2 methods for iteratively selecting genetically underrepresented individuals for breeding, whereas "Ranked MK Selection" and "Simultaneous MK Selection" are 2 methods for concurrently selecting the group of breeding individuals that produce offspring with the lowest average kinship. For populations with discrete generations (24 tested scenarios), we found that the Simultaneous and Ranked MK Selection methods were generally the best, nearly equivalent methods for selecting breeding pairs that retained GD and limited inbreeding. For populations with overlapping generations (198 tested scenarios), we found that Dynamic MK Selection was the most robust method for selecting breeding pairs. We used these results to provide guidelines for identifying which method of minimizing average kinship was most appropriate for various breeding program scenarios.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22246407     DOI: 10.1093/jhered/esr129

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hered        ISSN: 0022-1503            Impact factor:   2.645


  12 in total

1.  Purging deleterious mutations in conservation programmes: combining optimal contributions with inbred matings.

Authors:  M Á R de Cara; B Villanueva; M Á Toro; J Fernández
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.821

2.  The efficiency of close inbreeding to reduce genetic adaptation to captivity.

Authors:  K Theodorou; D Couvet
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 3.821

3.  Offspring survival changes over generations of captive breeding.

Authors:  Katherine A Farquharson; Carolyn J Hogg; Catherine E Grueber
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 14.919

4.  Captive breeding programs based on family groups in polyploid sturgeons.

Authors:  Elisa Boscari; Jose Martin Pujolar; Isabelle Dupanloup; Riccardo Corradin; Leonardo Congiu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  A comparison of pedigree, genetic and genomic estimates of relatedness for informing pairing decisions in two critically endangered birds: Implications for conservation breeding programmes worldwide.

Authors:  Stephanie J Galla; Roger Moraga; Liz Brown; Simone Cleland; Marc P Hoeppner; Richard F Maloney; Anne Richardson; Lyndon Slater; Anna W Santure; Tammy E Steeves
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2020-01-27       Impact factor: 5.183

6.  Take one step backward to move forward: Assessment of genetic diversity and population structure of captive Asian woolly-necked storks (Ciconia episcopus).

Authors:  Kornsuang Jangtarwan; Tassika Koomgun; Tulyawat Prasongmaneerut; Ratchaphol Thongchum; Worapong Singchat; Panupong Tawichasri; Toshiharu Fukayama; Siwapech Sillapaprayoon; Ekaphan Kraichak; Narongrit Muangmai; Sudarath Baicharoen; Chainarong Punkong; Surin Peyachoknagul; Prateep Duengkae; Kornsorn Srikulnath
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Breeding Strategies to Optimize Effective Population Size in Low Census Captive Populations: The Case of Gazella cuvieri.

Authors:  Candela Ojeda-Marín; Isabel Cervantes; Eulalia Moreno; Félix Goyache; Juan Pablo Gutiérrez
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 2.752

8.  Evolution of Peromyscus leucopus mice in response to a captive environment.

Authors:  Robert C Lacy; Glen Alaks; Allison Walsh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Pedigree analysis for the genetic management of group-living species.

Authors:  Belén Jiménez-Mena; Kristine Schad; Nick Hanna; Robert C Lacy
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2016-04-02       Impact factor: 2.912

10.  Genomic-Based Optimum Contribution in Conservation and Genetic Improvement Programs with Antagonistic Fitness and Productivity Traits.

Authors:  Enrique Sánchez-Molano; Ricardo Pong-Wong; Georgios Banos
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 4.599

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.