| Literature DB >> 31200540 |
Haile Berihulay1, Rabiul Islam2, Lin Jiang3, Yuehui Ma4.
Abstract
Genome-wide linkage disequilibrium is a useful parameter to study quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping and genetic selection. In many genomic methodologies, effective population size is an important genetic parameter because of its relationship to the loss of genetic variation, increases in inbreeding, the accumulation of mutations, and the effectiveness of selection. In this study, a total of 193 individuals were genotyped to assess the extent of LD and Ne in six Chinese goat populations using the SNP 50K BeadChip. Across the determined autosomal chromosomes, we found an average of 0.02 and 0.23 for r2 and D' values, respectively. The average r2 between all the populations varied little and ranged from 0.055 r2 for the Jining Grey to 0.128 r2 for the Guangfeng, with an overall mean of 0.083. Across the 29 autosomal chromosomes, minor allele frequency (MAF) was highest on chromosome 1 (0.321) and lowest on chromosome 25 (0.309), with an average MAF of 0.317, and showing the lowest (25.5% for Louping) and highest (28.8% for Qingeda) SNP proportions at MAF values > 0.3. The inbreeding coefficient ranged from 0.064 to 0.085, with a mean of 0.075 for all the autosomes. The Jining Grey and Qingeda populations showed higher Ne estimates, highlighting that these animals could have been influenced by artificial selection. Furthermore, a declining recent Ne was distinguished for the Arbas Cashmere and Guangfeng populations, and their estimated values were closer to 64 and 95, respectively, 13 generations ago, which indicates that these breeds were exposed to strong selection. This study provides an insight into valuable genetic information and will open up the opportunity for further genomic selection analysis of Chinese goat populations.Entities:
Keywords: SNP; effective population size; goat; linkage disequilibrium; minor allele frequency
Year: 2019 PMID: 31200540 PMCID: PMC6617254 DOI: 10.3390/ani9060350
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Summary of breed name, sample code, sample size, and physical distribution of six Chinese indigenous goat populations.
| Breed Name | Sample Code | Sample Size ( | Province |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nanjiang | NJ | 23 | Xinjiang |
| Qingeda | QGD | 24 | Xinjiang |
| Arbas Cashmere | AC | 59 | Inner Mongolia |
| Jining Grey | JN | 39 | Shandong |
| Louping | LP | 24 | Yunnan |
| Guangfeng | GF | 24 | Jiangxi |
Figure 1Geographic distribution and provinces of the six Chinese goat populations.
Figure 2Summary of SNPs and chromosome lengths included in the analysis. Red bars indicate the number of SNPs and the blue line indicates chromosome length.
Figure 3Population genetic structure and admixture analysis of six Chinese goat populations: (a) Neighbor-joining (NJ) tree. (b) Principal component analysis. (c) Level of admixture among the six goat breeds [25].
Summary of MAF in the six goat populations.
| Breed Name | Code | MAF < 0.05 |
|---|---|---|
| Nanjiang | NJ | 0.284 |
| Qingeda | QGD | 0.308 |
| Arbas Cashmere | AC | 0.276 |
| Jining Grey | JN | 0.416 |
| Louping | LP | 0.353 |
| Guangfeng | GF | 0.366 |
Summary of analyzed markers and average linkage disequilibrium (r2 and D’) separated by different distances across the 29 autosomal chromosomes.
| CHR | SNP ( | Size (Mb) | D’ | r2 | FIS | MAF | Distance (Mb) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2916 | 157.4 | 0.225 | 0.023 | 0.072 | 0.324 | 0.260 |
| 2 | 2502 | 136.51 | 0.225 | 0.023 | 0.075 | 0.327 | 0.260 |
| 3 | 2109 | 120.04 | 0.233 | 0.022 | 0.079 | 0.316 | 0.259 |
| 4 | 2190 | 120.74 | 0.229 | 0.023 | 0.064 | 0.319 | 0.259 |
| 5 | 2027 | 119.02 | 0.229 | 0.022 | 0.072 | 0.318 | 0.259 |
| 6 | 2161 | 117.64 | 0.235 | 0.023 | 0.073 | 0.318 | 0.259 |
| 7 | 1981 | 108.43 | 0.237 | 0.024 | 0.069 | 0.320 | 0.260 |
| 8 | 2064 | 112.67 | 0.226 | 0.022 | 0.085 | 0.321 | 0.259 |
| 9 | 1706 | 91.57 | 0.234 | 0.022 | 0.073 | 0.315 | 0.259 |
| 10 | 1846 | 101.09 | 0.223 | 0.021 | 0.079 | 0.319 | 0.259 |
| 11 | 1914 | 106.23 | 0.234 | 0.023 | 0.073 | 0.314 | 0.259 |
| 12 | 1543 | 87.28 | 0.229 | 0.023 | 0.073 | 0.318 | 0.259 |
| 13 | 1463 | 83.03 | 0.228 | 0.022 | 0.074 | 0.313 | 0.259 |
| 14 | 1719 | 94.67 | 0.231 | 0.022 | 0.080 | 0.312 | 0.260 |
| 15 | 1470 | 81.90 | 0.227 | 0.022 | 0.068 | 0.312 | 0.260 |
| 16 | 1406 | 79.37 | 0.237 | 0.024 | 0.083 | 0.312 | 0.260 |
| 17 | 1275 | 71.14 | 0.234 | 0.023 | 0.081 | 0.315 | 0.259 |
| 18 | 1165 | 67.28 | 0.223 | 0.021 | 0.070 | 0.318 | 0.259 |
| 19 | 1074 | 62.52 | 0.229 | 0.023 | 0.078 | 0.318 | 0.260 |
| 20 | 1362 | 71.78 | 0.224 | 0.022 | 0.072 | 0.320 | 0.259 |
| 21 | 1271 | 69.43 | 0.225 | 0.022 | 0.084 | 0.317 | 0.258 |
| 22 | 1040 | 60.28 | 0.231 | 0.023 | 0.077 | 0.317 | 0.259 |
| 23 | 922 | 48.87 | 0.212 | 0.020 | 0.064 | 0.321 | 0.259 |
| 24 | 1171 | 62.31 | 0.239 | 0.024 | 0.070 | 0.317 | 0.260 |
| 25 | 777 | 42.86 | 0.232 | 0.021 | 0.077 | 0.309 | 0.258 |
| 26 | 920 | 51.42 | 0.223 | 0.022 | 0.070 | 0.324 | 0.258 |
| 27 | 828 | 44.71 | 0.218 | 0.020 | 0.084 | 0.319 | 0.259 |
| 28 | 822 | 44.67 | 0.224 | 0.022 | 0.082 | 0.316 | 0.260 |
| 29 | 876 | 51.33 | 0.227 | 0.023 | 0.074 | 0.316 | 0.260 |
Figure 4LD decay (r2) from 0 up to 3000 kb for the six Chinese goat breeds.
Figure 5Average estimated effective population sizes in six goat populations. (a) Ne in the past 100 generations. (b) Ne over the past 1000 generations.