Literature DB >> 29182674

Genome-wide analysis of the diversity and ancestry of Korean dogs.

Bong Hwan Choi1, Hasini I Wijayananda2, Soo Hyun Lee2, Doo Ho Lee2, Jong Seok Kim3, Seok Il Oh3, Eung Woo Park1, Cheul Koo Lee4, Seung Hwan Lee2.   

Abstract

There are various hypotheses on dog domestication based on archeological and genetic studies. Although many studies have been conducted on the origin of dogs, the existing literature about the ancestry, diversity, and population structure of Korean dogs is sparse. Therefore, this study is focused on the origin, diversity and population structure of Korean dogs. The study sample comprised four major categories, including non-dogs (coyotes and wolves), ancient, modern and Korean dogs. Selected samples were genotyped using an Illumina CanineHD array containing 173,662 single nucleotide polymorphisms. The genome-wide data were filtered using quality control parameters in PLINK 1.9. Only autosomal chromosomes were used for further analysis. The negative off-diagonal variance of the genetic relationship matrix analysis depicted, the variability of samples in each population. FIS (inbreeding rate within a population) values indicated, a low level of inbreeding within populations, and the patterns were in concordance with the results of Nei's genetic distance analysis. The lowest FST (inbreeding rate between populations) values among Korean and Chinese breeds, using a phylogenetic tree, multi-dimensional scaling, and a TreeMix likelihood tree showed Korean breeds are highly related to Chinese breeds. The Korean breeds possessed a unique and large diversity of admixtures compared with other breeds. The highest and lowest effective population sizes were observed in Korean Jindo Black (485) and Korean Donggyeong White (109), respectively. The historical effective population size of all Korean dogs showed declining trend from the past to present. It is important to take immediate action to protect the Korean dog population while conserving their diversity. Furthermore, this study suggests that Korean dogs have unique diversity and are one of the basal lineages of East Asian dogs, originating from China.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29182674      PMCID: PMC5705110          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188676

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

Dogs belong to the family Canidae and show high diversity between and among different species. They have diverse feeding habits and advanced social organization. The dog was suggested as the first domesticated animal by archaeological discoveries around the world [1]. Moreover, it is considered as the most distinctive domesticated animal with regard to phenotypic diversity [2]. Behavioral and morphological features, as well as modern genetic evidence, suggest that dogs originated from gray wolves (Canis lupus) [1, 2, 3, 4]. There is much interest in determining the ancestry of dogs. Investigating the exact time period for dog domestication will help to clarify wolf and human engagement in the domestication process. It is vital to include Central Asia and other nearby regions, in developing a full picture of early dog history. Since specimens of ancient dogs are unavailable for DNA analysis, some researchers consider village dogs as a reliable sample that resembles ancient dogs [5]. The place of origin of domestic dogs is still inconclusive. There are diverse hypotheses on dog domestication based on various observations. Some literature suggests [6] that dogs have East Asian origin based on osteological features, which are similar to Chinese wolves. In contrast, several archeological studies suggest that domestic dogs originated in Southwest Asia [7]. Genetic information, models of phylogeographic dissimilarity and higher genetic diversity suggest an East Asian origin for domestic dogs [6]. In contrast, Shannon et al. [5] indicated that dogs were domesticated in Central Asia 15,000 years ago through an analysis of autosomal, mitochondrial and Y chromosomal information. Furthermore, Frantz’s study suggested a dual origin for dog domestication based on genomic and archeological evidence [7]. A large number of modern breeds originated from Europe within the past 200 years [8,9]. Among Asian countries, South Korea has a huge interest and demand for dogs. Recently, dogs have been raised for various purposes in South Korea, including as pets, and for, hunting, guarding, and military activities. There are 400 dog breeds worldwide, and among these, more than 150 are bred in South Korea [10]. Accurate determination of relationships among breeds and pedigree registration are vital to sucessful dog breeding. Korean Jindo White, Korean Poongsan White, Sapsaree, Korean Donggyeong White and Jeju dogs are believed to be native Korean dogs. A microsatellite locus analysis illustrated that Korean native dogs might have ancestry from the northern part of the East Asia [11]. The Korean Jindo dog is a widely known as a hunting and guarding dog. Further, the Korean Jindo White is believed to have been domesticated in the Stone Age. There is a little difference between male and female Jindo dogs (but males are larger than females). The standard height of the Jindo dog is ranges from 45 to 53 cm. They have yellow and white coat colors, and the tail is curled upward [12,13]. The front view of the face is nearly an inverted triangle. The forehead is wide, and the line from the forehead to the muzzle is unbroken. The line from the skullcap to a point between the eyes is longer than the line from the point between eyes to the end of the nose. The Poongsan breed is considered to be a hunting dog indigenous to North Korea. However, currently the original pedigree of many Poongsan dogs are raised in South Korea [14]. Its height and length range from 55 to 60 cm and 60 to 65 cm, respectively. The Poongsan breed is a relatively large dog. The color of the coat is white and it has a long muzzle. This breed can be differentiated based on a pea-sized bump under its chin, which is a unique characteristic of the Poongsan. [15] Gyeongju province is a primary area for breeding the Donggyeong dog in Korea. There are nearly 300 animals known to exist. They are friendly to humans, clean and fast. The height and length of female Donggyeong dogs are 45 and 53 cm while those of the male Donggyeong doga are 49 and 57 cm respectively. No tail or a very small tail is one identifying feature of this dog. Generally, they have four coat types: yellow, white, black, and leopard. The Korean Donggyeong has the longest history; therefore, its genetic structure is a valuable resource with great cultural value [16]. There are few scientific studies on the ancestry of Korean dogs. Therefore, this study investigated the genetic diversity, population structure, and origin of Korean dogs, using three Korean breeds (Jindo, Poongsan, and Donggyong). In addition, we compared Korean breeds with worldwide dog populations (ancient and modern breeds) using genome-wide analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs).

Materials and methods

Animals and genotype quality control

In total, 2258 animals were used as a sample for this study. To achieve the major objectives of the study, we selected coyote, wolve, and several breeds analyzed in a previous study [10], after reviewing the literature. The Akita (AKT), Chow Chow (CHO), Chinese Shar-Pei (CHS), Lhasa Apso (LHA), Basenji (BSJ), Afghan Hound (AFH), Alaskan Malamute (ALM), Saluki (SAL), Pekingese (PEK), Shiba Inu (SHI), Shi Tzu (SHT), Siberian Husky (SIH), and Tibetan terrier (TIT) dog breeds were categorized as ancient breeds in many publications due to high divergence levels compared to other dogs. It is believed that they originated > 500 years ago [17-18] and are highly associated with the original domestication of dogs [8,19,20]. Furthermore, these breeds can be considered a basal lineage of domestic dogs and live prototypes of ancestral dogs. Therefore, data on these dog breeds were extracted to investigate the relationship between ancient and Korean breeds. The Border Collie (BDC), Boxer (BOX), Cavalier King Charles Spaniel (CAV), Chinese Crested (CHC),Chihuahua (CHH), Croatian (CRS), English Setter (ENS), English Springer Spaniel (ESS), Great Dane (GRD), Golden Retriever (GRT), German Shepherd (GSD), Maltese (MAL), Miniature Pinscher (MNP), Miniature Schnauzer (MNS), and Newfoundland (NEF) were selected as modern breeds, representing all parts of the world. The sample comprised 1870 modern dog breeds. These breeds emerged during the Victorian era (circa 1830–1900) through controlled breeding practices. Their breeding regime was implemented by humans, and therefore they no longer have a close relationship with wolves [20]. The dog breeds in the sample sizes are indicated in S1 Table. Korean dogs used in this study included 189 individuals from 6 populations (belonging to three breeds), Korean Poongsan White (KPW), Korean Donggyengi White (KDW), Korean Jindo White (KJW), Korean Jindo Black (KJB), Korean Jindo Black and Tan (KJT), and Korean Jindo Brindle (KJD). Moreover, 7 coyotes and 81 wolves were included in the sample. Based on memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the research team and the research and breeding center, veterinarians collected blood samples for the research purposes of this study. All blood samples were obtained in an ethical manner, following guidelines for animal health and welfare. Advance approval was acquired from the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the National Institute of Animal Science, of the Rural Development Administration, of South Korea. Genomic DNA from the Korean dogs was isolated from blood samples using standard methods [21]. Samples were genotyped for 173,662 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) by Illumina CanineHD array. The quality of genome-wide data was maintained by the application of SNP filtering in PLINK 1.9 [22] based on the following quality control parameters: SNPs with low call rates (<90%) or high missing genotypes (>10%) were removed. To reduce bias in the data, the number of minor allele frequencies was limited to 1%. Dog genotypes obtained from other sources [5] were merged into our dataset. Only genotypes from autosomal chromosomes were used for further analysis.

Diversity, population structure, and phylogenetic analysis

Diversity and population structure analyses were performed using following algorithms: 1) pairwise fixation indices within populations (FIS) and between populations (FST) [23]; 2) heterozygosity and Nei’s standard genetic distance estimation [24]; 3) GRM estimation, 4) multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) analysis; 5) neighbor-joining tree and 6) ancestor’s admixture prediction. The fixation indices, and heterozygosity and Nei’s standard genetic distance analyses were performed using two R packages, hierfstat [25] and StAMPP [26]. GRM was estimated in GCTA v1.25.2 [27]. The four-dimensional pairwise genetic distances matrix was obtained from the calculation of the MDS algorithm in PLINK 1.9 [28] and depicted as a coordinate in R [28]. ADMIXTURE v1.23 [29] was used to detect possible mixtures of ancestral populations by the two to ten adjusted cluster models (K). The neighbor-joining tree was constructed using SNPhylo [30] and depicted in FigTree v1.4.2 [31].

Migration events, linkage disequilibrium (LD) and demographic estimation

An extended analysis of the relationships among dog populations was performed using TreeMix v1.12 [32]. This approach allows an estimation of possible historical splits and mixtures between populations, termed migration events. A maximum likelihood tree of populations was first produced. We generated a tree model to estimate migration events that may have occurred in the domestication of Korean dogs in relation to both ancient and modern Asian breeds. To account for LD in tree reconstruction, markers were grouped together in windows of 1,000 SNPs. Migration edges that best fit the data were evaluated based on the fraction of the variance defined in the matrix of residuals, in which positive values were preferred. To identify possible introgression traces in dog populations, we generated an f3 statistical analysis that was introduced [33] using the threepop command line. Three population (A, B, and C) statistical models with significant negative values for both the f3 statistic and Z-score were selected as a possible event of population B and C introgression in the population A. Demographic history of the dog population was reflected by the number of estimated recent to past effective population size (N). N was estimated from the LD value following Sved’s equation [34]. Prior to Ne calculation, LD was annotated as r to measure the correlation of alleles at two loci [35]. We used the default PLINK 1.9 [22] approach and SNeP V1.1 [36] to finalize the estimations of LD and N. The historical N values were plotted using R [28] with the estimated times on the horizontal ordinate.

Results

Population structure and diversity

The observed autosomes in the CanineHD array of our genotype data included 140,420 SNPs, as many as in the worldwide dog data obtained from Shannon et al [5]. After the cleaning process, the remaining autosomal SNPs for Korean dogs and other breeds (ancient and modern) were 98.7%, and 93.83%, respectively. The results of population structure analyses are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1

Data summary of observed dog populations.

BreedNo. of samplesObserved HeterozygosityExpected HeterozygosityFIS1GRM2Adjacent LD(SD)3Recent Ne4
DiagonalOff-diagonal
Korean dogs
KDW520.410.31-0.240.94-0.200.24(0.27)109
KPW190.410.31-0.240.83-0.050.23(0.25)110
KJW420.40.31-0.220.95-0.020.20(0.24)233
KJB320.40.31-0.220.94-0.030.20(0.24)485
KJD110.40.31-0.230.81-0.080.24(0.24)158
KJT320.40.30-0.220.92-0.030.21(0.24)262
Ancient dogs
AFH110.420.30-0.300.72-0.070.29(0.26)83
AKT120.360.27-0.270.69-0.060.28(0.26)84
ALM120.40.30-0.270.76-0.070.28(0.25)100
BSJ300.40.29-0.240.96-0.030.24(0.27)291
CHO120.370.28-0.250.66-0.130.31(0.24)97
CHS80.40.30-0.230.80-0.110.28(0.25)107
LHA150.440.33-0.250.91-0.060.27(0.26)182
PEK130.420.31-0.270.82-0.070.29(0.27)171
SAL70.430.31-0.280.74-0.120.31(0.26)88
SHI80.390.29-0.250.71-0.100.31(0.26)95
SHT270.420.31-0.260.89-0.030.27(0.28)166
SIH170.40.30-0.240.89-0.060.25(0.26)157
TIT70.440.32-0.300.69-0.120.32(0.26)60

1 Inbreeding coefficients

2 Average of the genomic relationship matrix referring to the inbreeding of the animal itself (Diagonal) and referring to the relationship between animals in the population (Off-diagonal)

3 Linkage disequilibrium estimated by the r method (0–20 Kb marker distance)

4 Effective population size (Ne)

1 Inbreeding coefficients 2 Average of the genomic relationship matrix referring to the inbreeding of the animal itself (Diagonal) and referring to the relationship between animals in the population (Off-diagonal) 3 Linkage disequilibrium estimated by the r method (0–20 Kb marker distance) 4 Effective population size (Ne) Variability of the samples in each population was shown by the negative off-diagonal variances in the GRM analysis. All Korean breeds had relatively high heterozygosity. The observed heterozygosity of the Akita, Shiba Inu and Chow Chow were slightly lower, while other ancient breeds ranged between 0.4 and—0.44. The inbreeding coefficients (within population FIS) of Korean breeds were between—0.22 and—0.23 while ancient breeds ranged from -0.23 to -0.3. The F of all dogs observed in this study was negative indicating that the sample used in this study had a low level of inbreeding. Population differences based on inbreeding coefficient (between populations -FST) (Table 2) were used to examine variation within Korean dog populations, as well as their correlation with wolves (gray, Chines, Russian, and Korean) and ancient and modern breeds (Table 2; lower diagonal). Among all selected breeds, Korean Jindo Black had the closest relationship with the Chinese Shar-Pei (FST value 8.079× 10−2). The FST values showed that all Korean breeds were closely related to each other and varied between 1.42 ×10−2 and 9.338 × 10−2. Low F values in Korean breeds suggest low population differentiation. The highest FST value was 35.13 ×10−2 between the Tibetan Terrier and Korean wolf, showing that they have the lowest degree of relatedness to each other. With regard to these relationships, Korean breeds were close to Chinese breeds with low FST values, especially Chow Chow and Chinese Shar Pei. Nei’s genetic distance between populations also indicated a close relationship between Chinese and Korean breeds.
Table 2

Pairwise F (inbreeding between populations) lower diagonal, and Nei’s genetic distance between populations upper diagonal.

AFHAKTALMBSJCHOCHSCHWGRWKDWKJBKJDKJTKJWKPWKRWLHAPEKRUWSALSHISHTSIHTIT
AFH00.1940.1750.1590.1760.1600.2120.1950.1400.1330.1440.1390.1340.1440.2520.1340.1610.2120.1300.1770.1550.1540.167
AKT0.33300.1510.1980.1230.1150.2140.1780.0920.0840.0930.0910.0830.1030.2360.1440.1700.2160.1840.1240.1640.1330.184
ALM0.2910.27300.1820.1380.1260.2000.1760.1080.0990.1110.1050.1000.1140.2340.1290.1540.2020.1630.1400.1490.0830.164
BSJ0.2890.3440.31300.1780.1640.2090.1750.1450.1380.1490.1430.1390.1490.2370.1420.1720.2080.1470.1830.1630.1600.173
CHO0.2850.2250.2270.30100.0830.2020.1600.0760.0630.0740.0670.0630.0840.2180.1280.1560.2030.1660.1120.1490.1170.171
CHS0.2540.2030.2020.2780.11300.1830.1500.0700.0580.0690.0620.0580.0770.2070.1120.1390.1830.1500.1040.1320.1060.153
CHW0.2590.2760.2450.2870.2330.20700.1590.1640.1610.1720.1660.1620.1730.2090.1710.1980.0130.2000.2020.1900.1850.203
GRW0.3030.2970.2780.2990.2440.2260.20100.1330.1240.1340.1280.1240.1410.1090.1630.1910.1520.1860.1690.1850.1570.202
KDW0.2240.1630.1790.2460.1160.1070.2100.21100.0280.0390.0320.0280.0540.1880.0940.1200.1650.1300.0860.1140.0880.134
KJB0.2140.1490.1640.2380.0870.0810.1990.1960.04700.0210.0140.0100.0420.1790.0880.1150.1620.1240.0760.1090.0790.129
KJD0.2320.1680.1810.2580.1020.0920.1990.2070.0560.01600.0240.0200.0530.1890.1000.1270.1730.1350.0860.1210.0900.141
KJT0.2240.1630.1750.2490.0980.0910.2080.2060.0550.0140.02400.0130.0460.1830.0930.1210.1670.1300.0810.1140.0840.135
KJW0.2150.1480.1660.2390.0900.0830.2040.1980.0490.0080.0160.01500.0420.1790.0890.1170.1630.1260.0760.1100.0800.131
KPW0.2360.1860.1920.2600.1300.1170.2110.2230.0930.0670.0780.0770.06900.1960.1010.1280.1740.1340.0950.1220.0940.141
KRW0.3690.3750.3400.3600.3220.2820.2440.1500.2540.2380.2590.2490.2400.27200.2200.2480.2130.2440.2270.2420.2150.258
LHA0.2140.2370.2030.2450.1840.1590.1960.2410.1510.1370.1460.1480.1410.1590.27900.0720.1720.1230.1280.0540.1100.116
PEK0.2670.2900.2530.2960.2430.2140.2370.2890.1940.1840.2000.1960.1880.2060.3390.11200.1980.1510.1540.0730.1380.139
RUW0.2530.2690.2420.2810.2300.2070.0090.1920.2110.2000.1990.2090.2050.2100.2420.1970.23400.2000.2030.1900.1860.203
SAL0.2170.3040.2560.2580.2470.2150.2250.2720.1970.1840.1970.1960.1880.2030.3320.1760.2320.22300.1680.1430.1430.152
SHI0.2900.2320.2360.3110.1810.1600.2380.2630.1390.1190.1340.1300.1210.1550.3330.1930.2470.2350.25500.1480.1230.167
SHT0.2570.2780.2470.2840.2350.2100.2410.2840.1910.1830.1960.1930.1860.2040.3280.0890.1300.2390.2250.23900.1310.132
SIH0.2550.2380.1460.2800.1870.1670.2270.2490.1500.1330.1460.1440.1360.1590.3000.1750.2260.2260.2220.2030.22000.147
TIT0.2690.3050.2590.2930.2560.2210.2290.2910.2030.1920.2070.2030.1960.2130.3510.1670.2180.2270.2240.2580.2110.2280

AFH: Afghan Hound, AKT: Akita, ALM: Alaskan Malamute, BSJ: Basenji, CHO: Chow Chow, CHS: Chinese Shar Pei, CHW: Chinese wolf, GRW: Gray wolf, KDW: Korean Donggyengi, KJB: Korean Jindo Black, KJD: Korean Jindo Brindle, KJT: Korean Jindo Black and Tan, KJW: Korean Jindo White, KPW: Korean Poongsan White, KRW: Korean wolf, LHA: Lhasa Apso, PEK:Pekingese, RUW: Russian wolf, SAL: Saluki, SHI: Shiba Inu, SHT: Shih Tzu, SIH: Siberian Husky, TIT:Tibetan Terrier

AFH: Afghan Hound, AKT: Akita, ALM: Alaskan Malamute, BSJ: Basenji, CHO: Chow Chow, CHS: Chinese Shar Pei, CHW: Chinese wolf, GRW: Gray wolf, KDW: Korean Donggyengi, KJB: Korean Jindo Black, KJD: Korean Jindo Brindle, KJT: Korean Jindo Black and Tan, KJW: Korean Jindo White, KPW: Korean Poongsan White, KRW: Korean wolf, LHA: Lhasa Apso, PEK:Pekingese, RUW: Russian wolf, SAL: Saluki, SHI: Shiba Inu, SHT: Shih Tzu, SIH: Siberian Husky, TIT:Tibetan Terrier The MDS results are depicted in Fig 1. The plot was constructed using coyotes, worldwide wolves, Korean dogs, and dogs from other parts of the world. MDS analysis allows visualization of the genetic distance of each breed within a selected sample. Various colors were used to differentiate breeds. The group containing wolves was placed in the left corner. All Korean breeds were situated near the non-dog group and were tightly clustered with each other. Chinese Shar-Pei, Chow Chow, and Shiba Inu clustered with the Korean breeds. European breeds such as Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, Chihuahua, Golden Retriever, and Miniature Pinscher were located further away from the wolves and Korean breeds. In particular, the Boxer was located furthest away from all other breeds at a great distance.
Fig 1

Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) plot of Korean dogs compared to ancient and selected modern breeds.

Points were separated using colors to differentiate each dog breed.

Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) plot of Korean dogs compared to ancient and selected modern breeds.

Points were separated using colors to differentiate each dog breed.

Population ancestries and migration events

Neighbor-joining tree (Fig 2), admixture (Fig 3 and Fig 4), and TreeMix (Fig 5 and S1 Fig) analyses were used to determine viable Korean dog ancestries. The neighbor-joining tree was constructed using the coyote, gray wolf, and ancient and Korean dogs. Coyote was selected as the root of the tree. The tree had two main branches. Siberian Husky and Alaskan Malamute (morphologically wolf-like dogs) formed another one sub clade next to the root. Afghan Hound, Basenji, Tibetan Terriers, Lhasa Apso, and Shi Tzu formed another branch, similar to a previous study [8], Shih Tzu and Lhasa Apso, which have similar appearances, were grouped in a single clade. The next branch was situated further away from the previous breeds and consisted of the Shiba Inu, Akita, Chow Chow, Chines Shar Pei and all Korean breeds. All Korean Poongsan White, Korean Donggyeong white, Korean Jindo Brindle, Korean Jindo Black, Korean Jindo White and Korean Jindo Black and Tan were found in a single clade.
Fig 2

Neighbor-joining tree of Korean dogs compared to coyote, gray wolf, and ancient dogs.

Neighbor-joining tree including coyote (CFC), gray wolf (GRW) Donggyeong white (KDW), Poongsan White (KPW), Jindo White (KJW), JindoBblack (KJB), Jindo Brindle (KJD), Korean Jindo Black and Tan (KJT), Afghan Hound (AFH), Akita (AKT), Alaskan Malamute (ALM), Basenji (BSJ), Chow Chow (CHO), Chinese Shar Pei (CHS), Lhasa Apso (LHA), Saluki (SAL), Shiba Inu (SHI), Shi Tzu (SHT), Siberian Husky (SIH)and Tibetan Terrier (TIT). The phylogeny was rooted with the coyote. Colors were used to differentiate among dog breeds, with Korean breeds indicated by different shades of green color.

Fig 3

Ancestry model for Korean breeds including ancient and selected modern breeds.

Each vertical line represents one individual. Admixture results include coyote (CFC), Korean wolf (KRW), Donggyeong White (KDW), Poongsan White (KPW), Jindo White (KJW), Jindo Black (KJB), Jindo Brindle (KJD), Korean Jindo Black and Tan(KJT), Afghan Hound (AFH), Akita (AKT), Alaskan Malamute (ALM), Basenji (BSJ), Chow Chow (CHO), Chinese Shar Pei (CHS), Lhasa Apso (LHA), Saluki (SAL), Shiba Inu (SHI), Shi Tzu (SHT), Siberian Husky (SIH), Tibetan Terrier (TIT), Boxer (BOX), and Cavalier King Charles Spaniel. Phylogeny was rooted in the coyote. K refers to the number of estimated ancestors, as differentiated by colors. The model started at K = 2.

Fig 4

Cross-validation plot of admixture analysis.

Admixture with cross-validation for K values 2,3,5, and 10.

Fig 5

Maximum likelihood tree with migration events.

Coyote (CFC) was selected as the root.Gray wolf (GRW), Korean wolf (KRW), Chinese wolf (CHW), European wolf (EUW),Mediterranean wolf (MEW), Russian wolf (RUW), US wolf (USW), Donggyeong White (KDW), Poongsan white (KPW), Jindo White (KJW), Jindo Black (KJB), Jindo Brindle (KJD), Korean Jindo Black and Tan (KJT), Afghan Hound (AFH), Akita (AKT), Alaskan Malamute (ALM), Basenji (BSJ), Chow Chow (CHO), Chinese Shar Pei (CHS), Lhasa Apso (LHA), Saluki (SAL), Shiba Inu (SHI), Shi Tzu (SHT), Siberian Husky (SIH),Tibetan Terrier (TIT), Border Collie (BDC), Boxer (BOX), Cavalier King Charles Spaniel (CAV), Chinese Crested (CHC), Chihuahua (CHH),Croatian (CRS), English Setter (ENS), English Springer Spaniel (ESS), Great Dane (GRD), Golden Retriever (GRT), German Shepherd (GSD), Japanese Chin (JPC), Labrador Retriever (LRT), Maltese (MAL), Miniature Pinscher (MNP), Miniature Schnauzer (MNS), Newfoundland (NEF) and Poodle (POO). Migration boundaries are denoted with arrows in the direction from the migrant’s origin to the recipient breed and heat colored according to the mixture percentage.

Neighbor-joining tree of Korean dogs compared to coyote, gray wolf, and ancient dogs.

Neighbor-joining tree including coyote (CFC), gray wolf (GRW) Donggyeong white (KDW), Poongsan White (KPW), Jindo White (KJW), JindoBblack (KJB), Jindo Brindle (KJD), Korean Jindo Black and Tan (KJT), Afghan Hound (AFH), Akita (AKT), Alaskan Malamute (ALM), Basenji (BSJ), Chow Chow (CHO), Chinese Shar Pei (CHS), Lhasa Apso (LHA), Saluki (SAL), Shiba Inu (SHI), Shi Tzu (SHT), Siberian Husky (SIH)and Tibetan Terrier (TIT). The phylogeny was rooted with the coyote. Colors were used to differentiate among dog breeds, with Korean breeds indicated by different shades of green color.

Ancestry model for Korean breeds including ancient and selected modern breeds.

Each vertical line represents one individual. Admixture results include coyote (CFC), Korean wolf (KRW), Donggyeong White (KDW), Poongsan White (KPW), Jindo White (KJW), Jindo Black (KJB), Jindo Brindle (KJD), Korean Jindo Black and Tan(KJT), Afghan Hound (AFH), Akita (AKT), Alaskan Malamute (ALM), Basenji (BSJ), Chow Chow (CHO), Chinese Shar Pei (CHS), Lhasa Apso (LHA), Saluki (SAL), Shiba Inu (SHI), Shi Tzu (SHT), Siberian Husky (SIH), Tibetan Terrier (TIT), Boxer (BOX), and Cavalier King Charles Spaniel. Phylogeny was rooted in the coyote. K refers to the number of estimated ancestors, as differentiated by colors. The model started at K = 2.

Cross-validation plot of admixture analysis.

Admixture with cross-validation for K values 2,3,5, and 10.

Maximum likelihood tree with migration events.

Coyote (CFC) was selected as the root.Gray wolf (GRW), Korean wolf (KRW), Chinese wolf (CHW), European wolf (EUW),Mediterranean wolf (MEW), Russian wolf (RUW), US wolf (USW), Donggyeong White (KDW), Poongsan white (KPW), Jindo White (KJW), Jindo Black (KJB), Jindo Brindle (KJD), Korean Jindo Black and Tan (KJT), Afghan Hound (AFH), Akita (AKT), Alaskan Malamute (ALM), Basenji (BSJ), Chow Chow (CHO), Chinese Shar Pei (CHS), Lhasa Apso (LHA), Saluki (SAL), Shiba Inu (SHI), Shi Tzu (SHT), Siberian Husky (SIH),Tibetan Terrier (TIT), Border Collie (BDC), Boxer (BOX), Cavalier King Charles Spaniel (CAV), Chinese Crested (CHC), Chihuahua (CHH),Croatian (CRS), English Setter (ENS), English Springer Spaniel (ESS), Great Dane (GRD), Golden Retriever (GRT), German Shepherd (GSD), Japanese Chin (JPC), Labrador Retriever (LRT), Maltese (MAL), Miniature Pinscher (MNP), Miniature Schnauzer (MNS), Newfoundland (NEF) and Poodle (POO). Migration boundaries are denoted with arrows in the direction from the migrant’s origin to the recipient breed and heat colored according to the mixture percentage. The results of the admixture analysis clearly show the genetic structure of Korean dogs in an ancestry-based model (Fig 3). We conducted admixture analysis with K = 2, K = 3, K = 5 and K = 10 and revealed that the lowest error after cross-validation was obtained with K = 10 (cross-validation error = 0.5153, Fig 4). K = 2, K = 3, K = 5, and K = 10 were selected to improve visualization of the ancestry model while displaying the relationship among Korean, ancient and modern breeds. The admixture results of K = 10 clearly showed the diversity and admixture of Korean breeds compared with other breeds. Although Korean dogs were admixed with both the ancient and wolf categories, they showed a distinctive admixture compared with all dogs in the sample. Korean Donggyeong White had a distinct genetic makeup from Jindo and Poongsan. Admixture analysis also showed a strong relationship among Chow Chow, Shar-Pei and Korean breeds. Akita, Alaskan Malamute, Basenji, Shi Tzu, Siberian Husky and Cavalier King Charles Spaniel showed very low levels of admixture. Korean breeds showed admixture events with some Japanese breeds, such as Akita and Shiba Inu. Close relationships among coyote, gray wolf, and Korean wolf were visualized in this analysis. Several migration events of Korean dogs were revealed using non-dogs, and ancient and modern dogs in the maximum likelihood tree (Fig 5). Migration edges that best fit the data were selected if they had positive values as seen in a plot of residuals (S1 Fig) with basal colors. The coyote was set as the root of the ancestry model. The tree showed that all Korean breeds were clustered in one branch with some ancient Chinese and Japanese dogs. The modern breeds clearly clustered together away from wolves while the Boxer exhibited the highest genetic drift in the sample. Several migration events could be observed in the TreeMix results. A few important migrations were observed from Korean Jindo Black to the Chinese Shar Pei, Akita to Tibetan spaniel and wolf clade to Basenji with a high migration weight. Observation of the residuals from the fit of the model to the data (S1 Fig) revealed that a number of populations do not adhere to a strict tree model. The f3 statistics were generated to trace the possible ancestry mixtures in Korean dogs using a sample that included ancient breeds, and the gray wolf. A concise table of the most significant f3 statistics (standardized to a Z score <—2) is shown in Table 3. Coyote and European wolf introgression on Russian wolf were significant.
Table 3

The most significant f3 statistics shown the possible ancestor mixture of Korean, ancient dog populations and outgroup.

Population APopulation BPopulation CF3 statisticsStandard ErrorZ-Score
Gray wolfCoyoteRussian wolf-0.00040.0004-1.1721
Gray wolfEuropean wolfCoyote-0.00130.0003-4.4004
Korean Jindo BlackGerman ShepherdKorean Jindo Black and Tan-0.00020.0004-0.5669
Russian wolfChinese wolfEuropean wolf-0.00030.0002-1.796
Russian wolfEuropean wolfCoyote-0.00050.0002-2.2198
Russian wolfKorean wolfEuropean wolf-0.00040.0002-1.5203

Most significant f3 results are indicated in bold.

Most significant f3 results are indicated in bold.

Demographic trends

The historical effective population size values were estimated based on the LD value across the genome and were used as a representation of demographic changes in the dog population. The adjacent LD (0–20 Kb marker distance) and recent Ne values of the observed dog breeds are summarized in Table 1 and averaged in Table 4 based on genetic distance ranges. Ne over ~20,000 generations is shown in Fig 6. All Korean dogs have low adjacent LD values than ancient breeds (Table 2). The highest effective population size (Ne) for Korean dogs was recorded twelve generations ago for the Korean Jindo Black (485), followed by these populations, in decreasing order: Jindo Black and Tan (262), Korean Jindo White (233), Korean Jindo Brindle (158), Poongsan White (110), Korean Donggyeong White (109).
Table 4

Historical effective population size (Ne).

KDW
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718181222
Ne1091241381581822072402803263894655536568431045126215971950243730054113
r20.07390.07480.07700.07790.07910.08120.08250.08380.08590.08690.08840.09090.09440.09340.09590.10160.10550.11440.12410.13910.1486
KPW
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718191221
Ne1101241391601832092402813293874645606808381037130216512084265534204474
r20.10690.10800.10990.11090.11210.11380.11590.11710.11860.12060.12180.12340.12540.12730.12990.13280.13630.14220.14980.15970.1728
KJW
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014095718201222
Ne2332633003423884435115966918029521100132415641844223426503113366144185183
r20.05010.05070.05120.05190.05280.05370.05450.05520.05640.05780.05880.06110.06250.06520.06880.07210.07760.08560.09630.10880.1293
KJB
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718201222
Ne48554259164872780790010141144128414701686193622362586298234233977457853036110
r20.04410.04450.04540.04630.04690.04790.04890.04990.05120.05270.05420.05590.05810.06060.06370.06790.07340.08030.09000.10300.1222
KJD
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014095718191221
Ne15818020523426730936141949257569081897711921458180922252815354844435609
r20.12940.12990.13060.13140.13240.13320.13380.13500.13600.13770.13850.14050.14270.14450.14710.14990.15440.15880.16550.17540.1891
KJT
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718201222
Ne2622933283664154665366116967989311087128015171802215625793110372445115436
r20.05470.05550.05640.05750.05840.05970.06060.06190.06350.06540.06700.06900.07130.07390.07720.08120.08650.09310.10250.11460.1323
AFH
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014095718191221
Ne8389971051151281421601832142512973584375476878901177155221112970
r20.16140.16660.17110.17690.18210.18740.19340.19880.20340.20730.21190.21650.22060.22490.22780.23260.23570.23920.24640.25350.2614
AKT
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718191221
Ne8488951041121241401571802122482953584415536948911187158221713032
r20.15330.15940.16520.17030.17660.18280.18720.19280.19770.20090.20560.20950.21290.21610.21890.22370.22800.23070.23630.24220.2510
CHO
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718191221
Ne97108122136153175200229270313370453546676844106413771817237632584561
r20.22770.22970.23170.23430.23690.23890.24140.24440.24610.24930.25200.25280.25560.25750.25990.26300.26530.26810.27400.27840.2848
CHS
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718191222
Ne107118132147165189217250288344412498607760947120715251987260834314735
r20.18080.18330.18540.18800.19070.19240.19440.19680.19980.20070.20220.20400.20580.20660.20900.21090.21500.21860.22380.23170.2393
LHA
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014095718201222
Ne182194207223244267290325362414474547640758925113214031764223228743738
r20.10010.10290.10600.10910.11190.11530.11950.12280.12700.13040.13450.13900.14360.14850.15240.15770.16370.17080.18010.19150.2072
PEK
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718191222
Ne1711771861972032162302512743043433884505276417809771262164822043018
r20.11240.11640.12030.12470.13080.13620.14260.14850.15500.16180.16830.17590.18280.19050.19610.20380.21050.21660.22470.23370.2453
SAL
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718191220
Ne889810812013315017219722926932338947257371391311511493199026913739
r20.20980.21220.21550.21880.22270.22650.22870.23210.23500.23770.23950.24180.24440.24830.25130.25330.25860.26360.26840.27500.2832
SHI
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014095718191221
Ne9510211112213415016919322526230736644154668586111131453195826593721
r20.18730.19200.19560.19990.20450.20830.21220.21590.21880.22200.22600.22930.23290.23500.23740.24130.24430.24860.25240.25850.2660
SHT
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718201222
Ne1661691751841942092252442713023443914555406477909851249160321192829
r20.07360.07840.08320.08790.09340.09830.10410.11030.11610.12240.12820.13530.14200.14830.15530.16250.16980.17810.18830.19910.2147
SIH
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014105718191221
Ne157167180194212231257288324370427501595717877108413471726221028563791
r20.09750.10070.10380.10730.11060.11450.11800.12180.12580.12960.13370.13730.14110.14490.14890.15350.15950.16500.17330.18430.1976
TIT
GenAgo1214161923273238465669851061351732263014095718191221
Ne60667483951091251461692022432953674535717249501262168623243311
r20.23780.24170.24510.24870.25190.25410.25720.25950.26370.26530.26710.26910.26980.27250.27490.27830.27980.28260.28780.29280.2986

KDW: Korean Donggyongi White, KPW: Korean Poongsan White, KJW:Korean Jindo white, KJB: Korean Jindo Black KJD: Korean Jindo Brindle KJT: Korean Jindo Black, AFH: Afghan Hound, AKT: Akita; CHO: Chow Chow, CHS: Chines Shar Pei, LHA: Lhasa Apso, PEK: Pekingese, SAL: Saluki, SHI: Shiba Inu, SHT: Shi Tzu; SIH: Siberian Husky; TIT: Tibetan Terrier

Fig 6

Historical trends in the effective population size of Korean dogs.

Trends of the effective population size range from ~12 to 25,000 generations. Lines are colored based on breeds.

Historical trends in the effective population size of Korean dogs.

Trends of the effective population size range from ~12 to 25,000 generations. Lines are colored based on breeds. KDW: Korean Donggyongi White, KPW: Korean Poongsan White, KJW:Korean Jindo white, KJB: Korean Jindo Black KJD: Korean Jindo Brindle KJT: Korean Jindo Black, AFH: Afghan Hound, AKT: Akita; CHO: Chow Chow, CHS: Chines Shar Pei, LHA: Lhasa Apso, PEK: Pekingese, SAL: Saluki, SHI: Shiba Inu, SHT: Shi Tzu; SIH: Siberian Husky; TIT: Tibetan Terrier The effective population size (Ne) of all Korean dogs exhibited a declining pattern from the past to recent times (Fig 6). This has caused a decrease in the inbreeding rate from the past to present in Korean dog breeds. The Ne trend for Korean Donggyeong White and Korean Jindo White can be traced back to 239,233 (while other breeds can be traced back to more than ~1,000,000 years ago Table 4).

Discussion

This study was based on genome-wide SNP data to reveal information on diversity, population structure, ancestry, migration events, and demographic trends compared with ancient, and modern breeds and their ancestors (wolves and coyotes). Dogs originated from the gray wolf, and various studies have presented diverse hypotheses for dog domestication [37, 38]. Although a considerable number of studies used different methods, they had various drawbacks and information on the ancestry of Korean dogs is rare. Data based on genome-wide SNPs are appropriate for these types of studies and some previous studies have used this kind of data. However, most of these studies have lacked samples from Northeast Asia, especially from Korea. Therefore, this study mainly focused on the diversity and ancestry of Korean dogs and revealed interesting information about these dogs. Ascertainment bias is the systematic variation of population genetic statistics from theoretical expectations. It occurs due to sampling a non-random set of individuals, small sample sizes, or biased SNP discovery protocols [39]. Moreover, small sample size tends to bias towards common SNPs in the allele frequency distribution [40]. This error always occurs, unless sequencing is performed on the whole genome of every individual. High coverage sequencing data, analysis of a large number of SNPs [41,42], raw data modification, and incorporating ascertainment bias into the theoretical models of population genetics can minimize this error [39]. The ascertainment bias in our analysis was minimized by using a considerable sample size, a large SNP genotype dataset and through sample size correction protocols. Therefore, the present study provides precise results on Korean dog ancestry. The data used in this study were grouped into four different categories to improve the clarity of the analysis. GRM analysis was performed for all Korean breeds and ancient dogs. The heterozygosity in Korean dogs was high (around 0.4), while the inbreeding coefficient within populations indicates that all Korean breeds in this study had a low level of inbreeding. Previously, it was revealed that Korean Donggyeong White, Korean Jindo White, and Korean Poongsan White had heterozygosity values of 0.77,0.70, and 0.74, respectively [43]. The sample of this study has a low level of heterozygosity compared to that study. Lee et al. [44] showed an average inbreeding coefficient within populations of Korean breeds of 0.028. The inbreeding coefficient is comparatively higher than this study. Ancient history and recent factors such as breeding programs introduced during the past few hundred years can lead to changes in the genetic diversity of individuals. Nevertheless, the variation may be due to the differentiation between samples and different methodologies used in the studies [45]. FST values were used to investigate genetic diversity between populations. Korean breeds showed more similar allele frequencies with some Chinese breeds (Chow Chow and Chinese Shar Pei.) than others in the sample. The MDS, TreeMix and admixture results also indicated close relationships between Korean and Chinese breeds. MDS analysis showed that Korean breeds are closely related to wolves. The modern breeds show a distinct genetic background from their dog ancestors. It was previously found that Southeast Asian dogs were closely related to wolves, especially Chow Chow, Akita and Chinese Shar Pei. Further, they are considered a foundation lineage connecting to the gray wolf [6,45,46, 47]. Fan et al. [48] found that the Boxer genome does not follow any wolf population, which agrees with our results. Some publications clearly established that gray wolves (C. lupus) are distributed throughout China in both ancient and modern times [49]. According to Wang et al., [45] wolves from the southern part of East Asia have a significant genetic relationship with domestic dogs. All of these studies shed light on East Asian dog domestication. The results of our study are in significant agreement with these previous studies. Because there is little literature showing the close relationship among Chinese wolves, Korean wolves, and dogs, our observations represent a reliable source of information for future studies. The phylogenetic tree, MDS, admixture analysis, and TreeMix results provide evidence showing that Korean dogs have a close relationship with Japanese breeds. A previous study also revealed that Korean dogs were brought to Japan many years ago [50]. The admixture analysis revealed that Korean breeds are uniquely diverse compared with all other breeds, although they were admixed with both wolf and ancient dog breeds. Korean Donggyeong White showed a different genetic makeup from when compared to other Korean breeds. Nevertheless, most of the migration events could not be identified from the F statistics due to the difficulty in identifying admixtures due to the large amount of genetic drift since the admixture event [51]. Effective population size is the main factor in population genetics and conservation [51] because it strongly associated with inbreeding, fitness and loss of genetic variation through random genetic drift [52, 53]. Therefore, it is considered as an important criterion for determining the endengerment of a population [54,55]. The historical effective population size suggests that all Korean breeds exhibit decreasing effective population sizes over long time scales. The results of this analysis are agree with a previous study of effective population size in the Sapsaree breed [56]. The smallest effective population size were observed in the Korean Poongsan White and Korean Donggyeong White breeds, while the largest effective population size was observed in Korean Jindo Black. This results signals increasing inbreeding rate over time. Artificial breeding, or domestication can cause a reduction in effective population sizes [57,58]. Thus, the observed effect may be due to the number of breeding programs that have been introduced recently, and could be related to the observed heterozygosity reduction. The study conducted by Calboli et al, [59] revealed adverse consequences (loss of unique genetic variants, high prevalence of recessive genetic disorders) of increasing inbreeding rates and a dramatic effect of breeding patterns on genetic diversity based on pedigree information. These results are in accordance with the findings of our study. It has been noted previously that populations of breeds or species require a minimum effective population size of about 50 or 100 [60]. Therefore, the declining effective population sizes of Korean dogs, especially, the Korean Poongsan White and Korean Donggyeonng White emphasize the need for strong actions and strategies to increase the effective population size while maintaining the genetic diversity these breeds.

Conclusion

This study presents some interesting findings on the diversity, population structure, ancestral admixture, and demographic history of Korean dog breeds. Since there are few studies on the ancestry and diversity of Korean dog breeds, our study helps to fill gaps in knowledge this population. Korean dogs have clear genetic divergence from modern breeds. The unique genetic structure of Korean dogs has caused them to have extremely distinctive characteristics. It is clear that the effective population size of Korean dogs has decreased from the past to present due to increased inbreeding due to modern breeding programs. The present results emphasize that Korean dogs have a close relationship with ancient Chinese and Japanese breeds. Since most analyses in the study showed a strong relationship between Korean and Chinese breeds, migration of dogs between China and Korea can be scientifically validated by our study. Therefore, this study suggests Chinese ancestry for Korean dogs. The geographical location, previous studies and the history of these two countries support this hypothesis. Moreover, Korean breeds show a closer relationship with ancient dog breeds than the wolf ancestor. Therefore, we suggest that Korean dogs are also one of the indigenous dog categories that can be considered as the basis of the East-Asian dog domestication process. The various types of admixture events leading to increased diversity of Asian dogs including Korean dogs is greater than in any other part of the world. Korean Donggyeong has a different genetic composition from than other Korean breeds. More studies using whole genome sequencing data, larger sample size and more Korean dog varieties are needed to improve accuracy and to investigate the exact time period for Korean dog domestication.

Dog classification with sample sizes used in this analysis.

(DOCX) Click here for additional data file.

Plot of residuals from TreeMix analysis depicted in Fig 5.

(TIF) Click here for additional data file.

Inferred dog tree with migration events (three migrations).

(TIF) Click here for additional data file.

Inferred dog tree with migration events (five migrations).

(TIF) Click here for additional data file.

Inferred dog tree with migration events (seven migrations).

(TIF) Click here for additional data file.

SNP information of Korean breeds (.bed file).

(BED) Click here for additional data file.

SNP information of Korean breeds (.bim file).

(BIM) Click here for additional data file.

SNP information of Korean breeds (.fam file).

(FAM) Click here for additional data file.
  42 in total

1.  Extent of linkage disequilibrium and effective population size in Finnish Landrace and Finnish Yorkshire pig breeds.

Authors:  P Uimari; M Tapio
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 2.  SNP ascertainment bias in population genetic analyses: why it is important, and how to correct it.

Authors:  Joseph Lachance; Sarah A Tishkoff
Journal:  Bioessays       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 4.345

3.  Molecular evolution of the dog family.

Authors:  R K Wayne
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 11.639

4.  Genetic structure of the purebred domestic dog.

Authors:  Heidi G Parker; Lisa V Kim; Nathan B Sutter; Scott Carlson; Travis D Lorentzen; Tiffany B Malek; Gary S Johnson; Hawkins B DeFrance; Elaine A Ostrander; Leonid Kruglyak
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-05-21       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Identification of genomic regions associated with phenotypic variation between dog breeds using selection mapping.

Authors:  Amaury Vaysse; Abhirami Ratnakumar; Thomas Derrien; Erik Axelsson; Gerli Rosengren Pielberg; Snaevar Sigurdsson; Tove Fall; Eija H Seppälä; Mark S T Hansen; Cindy T Lawley; Elinor K Karlsson; Danika Bannasch; Carles Vilà; Hannes Lohi; Francis Galibert; Merete Fredholm; Jens Häggström; Ake Hedhammar; Catherine André; Kerstin Lindblad-Toh; Christophe Hitte; Matthew T Webster
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2011-10-13       Impact factor: 5.917

6.  Individual increase in inbreeding allows estimating effective sizes from pedigrees.

Authors:  Juan Pablo Gutiérrez; Isabel Cervantes; Antonio Molina; Mercedes Valera; Félix Goyache
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  Estimation of Effective Population Size in the Sapsaree: A Korean Native Dog (Canis familiaris).

Authors:  M Alam; K I Han; D H Lee; J H Ha; J J Kim
Journal:  Asian-Australas J Anim Sci       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.509

8.  SNeP: a tool to estimate trends in recent effective population size trajectories using genome-wide SNP data.

Authors:  Mario Barbato; Pablo Orozco-terWengel; Miika Tapio; Michael W Bruford
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 4.599

9.  Worldwide patterns of genomic variation and admixture in gray wolves.

Authors:  Zhenxin Fan; Pedro Silva; Ilan Gronau; Shuoguo Wang; Aitor Serres Armero; Rena M Schweizer; Oscar Ramirez; John Pollinger; Marco Galaverni; Diego Ortega Del-Vecchyo; Lianming Du; Wenping Zhang; Zhihe Zhang; Jinchuan Xing; Carles Vilà; Tomas Marques-Bonet; Raquel Godinho; Bisong Yue; Robert K Wayne
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 9.043

10.  Molecular genetic diversity of the Gyeongju Donggyeong dog in Korea.

Authors:  Eun-Woo Lee; Seong-Kyoon Choi; Gil-Jae Cho
Journal:  J Vet Med Sci       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 1.267

View more
  4 in total

1.  Dwarfism in Tibetan Terrier dogs with an LHX3 mutation.

Authors:  Tuddow Thaiwong; Sarah Corner; Stacey La Forge; Matti Kiupel
Journal:  J Vet Diagn Invest       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 1.279

2.  Genetic diversity and population structure of the Sapsaree, a native Korean dog breed.

Authors:  Chandima Gajaweera; Ji Min Kang; Doo Ho Lee; Soo Hyun Lee; Yeong Kuk Kim; Hasini I Wijayananda; Jong Joo Kim; Ji Hong Ha; Bong Hwan Choi; Seung Hwan Lee
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 2.797

3.  Population structure and genetic history of Tibetan Terriers.

Authors:  Mateja Janeš; Minja Zorc; Vlatka Cubric-Curik; Ino Curik; Peter Dovc
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2019-12-27       Impact factor: 4.297

4.  Local ancestry inference provides insight into Tilapia breeding programmes.

Authors:  Alex Avallone; Kerry L Bartie; Sarah-Louise C Selly; Khanam Taslima; Antonio Campos Mendoza; Michaël Bekaert
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-29       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.