| Literature DB >> 32664855 |
Gabriele Senczuk1, Salvatore Mastrangelo2, Elena Ciani3, Luca Battaglini4, Filippo Cendron5, Roberta Ciampolini6, Paola Crepaldi7, Roberto Mantovani5, Graziella Bongioni8, Giulio Pagnacco9, Baldassare Portolano10, Attilio Rossoni11, Fabio Pilla1, Martino Cassandro5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Assessment of genetic diversity and population structure provides important control metrics to avoid genetic erosion, inbreeding depression and crossbreeding between exotic and locally-adapted cattle breeds since these events can have deleterious consequences and eventually lead to extinction. Historically, the Alpine Arc represents an important pocket of cattle biodiversity with a large number of autochthonous breeds that provide a fundamental source of income for the entire regional economy. By using genotype data from medium-density single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays, we performed a genome-wide comparative study of 23 cattle populations from the Alpine Arc and three cosmopolitan breeds.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32664855 PMCID: PMC7362560 DOI: 10.1186/s12711-020-00559-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genet Sel Evol ISSN: 0999-193X Impact factor: 4.297
Fig. 1Geographic location of the 23 local cattle breeds from the Alpine Arc analyzed in this study. Cosmopolitan breeds are not shown
Genetic diversity indices for the analyzed cattle breeds
| Breed | Number | Code | Ho ± SD | He ± SD | MAF ± SD | Ne |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Italian Holstein | 32 | HOLS | 0.342 ± 0.171 | 0.336 ± 0.154 | 0.305 ± 0.209 | 77 |
| Cika | 26 | CIKA | 0.356 ± 0.163 | 0.347 ± 0.141 | 0.277 ± 0.163 | 107 |
| Pinzgauer (Italy) | 24 | PZIT | 0.350 ± 0.172 | 0.337 ± 0.149 | 0.282 ± 0.179 | 76 |
| Pinzgauer (Austria) | 30 | PZAU | 0.351 ± 0.163 | 0.342 ± 0.144 | 0.280 ± 0.173 | 122 |
| Pustertaler | 24 | PUST | 0.342 ± 0.185 | 0.324 ± 0.16 | 0.276 ± 0.180 | 62 |
| Burlina | 24 | BURL | 0.353 ± 0.167 | 0.345 ± 0.145 | 0.292 ± 0.185 | 83 |
| Rendena | 24 | REND | 0.334 ± 0.176 | 0.327 ± 0.156 | 0.274 ± 0.188 | 82 |
| Tyrolean Grey | 30 | GRTY | 0.335 ± 0.169 | 0.332 ± 0.152 | 0.272 ± 0.179 | 93 |
| Simmental (Germany) | 30 | SIDE | 0.339 ± 0.168 | 0.332 ± 0.151 | 0.269 ± 0.175 | 127 |
| Simmental (Switzerland) | 20 | SISW | 0.342 ± 0.177 | 0.330 ± 0.152 | 0.270 ± 0.178 | 92 |
| Simmental (Italy) | 31 | SIIT | 0.342 ± 0.167 | 0.333 ± 0.149 | 0.270 ± 0.174 | 113 |
| Montbéliard | 20 | MONT | 0.337 ± 0.193 | 0.316 ± 0.163 | 0.270 ± 0.198 | 60 |
| Brown Swiss (Germany) | 30 | BRDE | 0.319 ± 0.179 | 0.311 ± 0.163 | 0.270 ± 0.190 | 79 |
| Brown Swiss | 19 | BRSW | 0.320 ± 0.191 | 0.307 ± 0.167 | 0.268 ± 0.206 | 56 |
| Brown Swiss (Italy) | 32 | BRIT | 0.309 ± 0.185 | 0.301 ± 0.168 | 0.266 ± 0.211 | 65 |
| Original Brown (Switzerland) | 20 | OBSW | 0.338 ± 0.176 | 0.331 ± 0.151 | 0.272 ± 0.179 | 81 |
| Original Brown (Italy) | 18 | OBIT | 0.348 ± 0.179 | 0.334 ± 0.149 | 0.278 ± 0.183 | 90 |
| Original Brown (Germany/Switzerland) | 35 | OBDS | 0.338 ± 0.166 | 0.332 ± 0.151 | 0.270 ± 0.177 | 124 |
| Evolène | 21 | EVOL | 0.311 ± 0.185 | 0.309 ± 0.166 | 0.271 ± 0.206 | 59 |
| Eringer | 36 | ERIN | 0.333 ± 0.169 | 0.327 ± 0.155 | 0.270 ± 0.183 | 130 |
| Pezzata Rossa D’Oropa | 23 | PRDO | 0.335 ± 0.176 | 0.329 ± 0.154 | 0.271 ± 0.181 | 80 |
| Abondance | 20 | ABON | 0.346 ± 0.189 | 0.323 ± 0.159 | 0.272 ± 0.190 | 68 |
| Tarine | 18 | TARI | 0.336 ± 0.185 | 0.325 ± 0.158 | 0.272 ± 0.188 | 72 |
| Vosgienne | 20 | VOSG | 0.347 ± 0.178 | 0.335 ± 0.15 | 0.271 ± 0.174 | 75 |
| Barà-Pustertaler | 24 | BPUS | 0.351 ± 0.164 | 0.344 ± 0.142 | 0.275 ± 0.165 | 94 |
| Varzese-Ottonese | 30 | VZOT | 0.348 ± 0.164 | 0.341 ± 0.146 | 0.279 ± 0.174 | 87 |
| Murnau-Werdenfelser | 30 | MAWE | 0.349 ± 0.179 | 0.328 ± 0.156 | 0.274 ± 0.186 | 73 |
| Jersey | 20 | JERS | 0.297 ± 0.198 | 0.286 ± 0.176 | 0.286 ± 0.246 | 56 |
Observed (Ho) and expected (He) heterozygosity, average minor allele frequency (MAF), effective population size (Ne) and standard deviation (SD)
Fig. 2Inbreeding coefficients (FROH) inferred from runs of homozygosity for each breed. For a full definition of breeds, see Table 1
Fig. 3Genetic relatedness of cattle breeds using a multidimensional scaling (MDS) approach. The first two dimensions, C1 and C2, explained 3.2 and 2.3%, respectively, of the total variation. For a full definition of breeds, see Table 1
Fig. 4Admixture analysis plot in a circular fashion. The most significant values of K (number of genetic clusters) according to the cross-validation parameters are shown. For a full definition of breeds, see Table 1
Fig. 5Neighbor-net graph based on Reynolds genetic distances. The color of breed codes highlights the main geographic clusters: green for Western Alps, orange for Eastern Alps and blue for Central Alps. For a full definition of breeds, see Table 1
Fig. 6Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree inferred using TreeMix with no migration event (a) and with four migration edges allowed (b). The Baoule cattle (TAU_AF-BAO) was used as an outgroup. For a full definition of breeds, see Table 1