| Literature DB >> 26697284 |
Ashraf Ullah1, Abhisak Basak1, Md Nazrul Islam1, Md Samsul Alam1.
Abstract
The founder stock of a captive breeding program is prone to changes in genetic structure due to inbreeding and genetic drift. Genetic characterization of the founder population using suitable molecular markers may help monitor periodic changes in the genetic structure in future. To develop benchmark information about the genetic structure we analyzed six microsatellite loci in the Brodbank collections of rohu (Labeo rohita) originated from three major rivers-the Jamuna, the Padma and the Halda. A total of 28 alleles were detected in 90 individuals with an average of 4.6 alleles per locus. The average observed heterozygosity ranged from 0.655 to 0.705 and the expected heterozygosity ranged from 0.702 to 0.725. The mean F IS values were 0.103, 0.106 and 0.018 for the Jamuna, Padma and Halda fishes respectively. The population pair-wise F ST values ranged from 0.0057 to 0.0278. Structure analysis grouped the fishes of the three rivers into two clusters. The numbers of half-sib families were 5, 5 and 4 and the numbers of full-sib families were 12, 10 and 18 for the Halda, Jamuna and the Padma samples respectively. Bottleneck was detected in all the river samples. We recommend to collect more fish from different locations of the major rivers to broaden the genetic variability of the founder stocks of the Brood bank.Entities:
Keywords: Bottleneck; Brood bank; Genetic variation; Major carps; Microsatellite; Sib-ship
Year: 2015 PMID: 26697284 PMCID: PMC4678141 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-015-1571-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Genetic variation in three populations of L. rohita
| Locus | Allele sizes (bp) | PIC | Parameters | Population | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jamuna | Padma | Halda | ||||
|
| 140–164 | 0.776 |
| 6.000 | 5.000 | 6.000 |
|
| 0.833 | 0.600 | 0.733 | |||
|
| 0.808 | 0.762 | 0.685 | |||
|
| −0.014 | 0.229 | −0.007 | |||
| HWEP | 0.0001* | 0.0000* | 0.0001* | |||
|
| 142–166 | 0.754 |
| 5.000 | 5.000 | 5.000 |
|
| 0.500 | 0.633 | 0.767 | |||
|
| 0.762 | 0.742 | 0.733 | |||
|
| 0.359 | 0.163 | −0.029 | |||
| HWEP | 0.0000* | 0.0000* | 0.0000* | |||
|
| 138–154 | 0.747 |
| 4.000 | 4.000 | 4.000 |
|
| 0.600 | 0.533 | 0.567 | |||
|
| 0.736 | 0.740 | 0.741 | |||
|
| 0.201 | 0.295 | 0.285 | |||
| HWEP | 0.0033* | 0.0045* | 0.0035* | |||
|
| 148–178 | 0.705 |
| 4.000 | 4.000 | 4.000 |
|
| 0.700 | 0.833 | 0.800 | |||
|
| 0.662 | 0.727 | 0.691 | |||
|
| −0.041 | −0.130 | −0.142 | |||
| HWEP | 0.3507NS | 0.2827NS | 0.0069* | |||
|
| 184–192 | 0.646 |
| 3.000 | 3.000 | 3.000 |
|
| 0.567 | 0.667 | 0.667 | |||
|
| 0.643 | 0.620 | 0.598 | |||
|
| 0.135 | −0.058 | −0.098 | |||
| HWEP | 0.2589NS | 0.0521NS | 0.1822NS | |||
|
| 132–168 | 0.808 |
| 6.000 | 6.000 | 6.000 |
|
| 0.767 | 0.667 | 0.700 | |||
|
| 0.738 | 0.761 | 0.764 | |||
|
| −0.022 | 0.140 | 0.100 | |||
| HWEP | 0.0010* | 0.0261NS | 0.0353NS | |||
| Mean(±SD) | 4.667 ± 1.211 | 4.50 ± 1.048 | 4.667 ± 1.211 | |||
| Mean(±SD) | 0.661 ± 0.127 | 0.655 ± 0.10 | 0.705 ± 0.082 | |||
| Mean(±SD) | 0.724 ± 0.061 | 0.725 ± 0.053 | 0.702 ± 0.059 | |||
| Mean(±SD) | 0.103 ± 0.158 | 0.106 ± 0.165 | 0.018 ± 0.154 | |||
PIC Polymorphic information content, Ar Allelic richness, Ho observed heterozygosity, He expected heterozygosity, F inbreeding coefficient, HWEP probabilities for Hardy-Weinberg expectation, NS not significant
* Significant after sequential Bonferroni corrections (initial k = 3, Rice, 1989)
Fig. 1a Log probability of data L(K) for each k values ranging from 1 to 5 for the admixture and correlated frequencies model (averaged over five independent runs) for the brood bank collections of L. rohita (k = number of cluster). b Delta k values for each of the k inferred clusters of L. rohita with a maximum value obtained at k = 2
Above diagonal: pairwise estimates of F and their associated 95 % confidence interval (±) calculated based on bootstrapping over loci (1000 replications) (P critical = 0.01667, after Bonferroni correction)
| Population | Jamuna | Padma | Halda |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jamuna | 0.0255* ± 0.0015 | 0.0057 ± 0.0007 | |
| Padma | 0.128 | 0.0278* ± 0.0015 | |
| Halda | 0.062 | 0.124 |
Below diagonal: Nei’s (1972) genetic distance between population pairs of L. rohita
* Significant after sequential Bonferroni corrections (initial k = 3)
Results of bottleneck test for three river stocks of L. rohita Broodbank
| Population | Sign test | Wilcoxon rank test | Mode shift | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IAM | TPM | SMM | IAM | TPM | SMM | ||
| Jamuna | 0.037 | 0.041 | 0.043 | 0.015* | 0.015* | 0.015* | Shifted |
| Padma | 0.033 | 0.041 | 0.043 | 0.015* | 0.015* | 0.015* | Shifted |
| Halda | 0.033 | 0.038 | 0.044 | 0.015* | 0.015* | 0.015* | Shifted |
The values indicate probability under the hypotheses of mutation drift equilibruim
* Evidence for recent bottlenecks (P < 0.0167) (after Bonferroni correction)
Shifted mode of allele frequency indicates occurrence of recent genetic bottlenecks
Fig. 2Results of sibship reconstruction grouping the individuals into full-sib families under the corresponding half-sib families (cluster). The upper hierarchy of the figures denotes the source of the sample, the second hierarchy denotes the half-sib families (cluster) and the third hierarchy denotes individual full-sib families nested within half-sib families. The number of individuals included to each full-sib family is mentioned. a Sibship reconstruction based on real Halda river (HR) individuals, b simulated unrelated HR individuals, c real Jamuna river (JR) individuals, d simulated unrelated JR individuals, e real Padma river (PR) individuals, f simulated unrelated PR individuals