Knowledge of population genetic diversity is important for effective management and
the development of sustainable conservation and improvement strategies. DNA
polymorphism analysis is a powerful tool for analyzing genetic variation within and
among individuals, families, populations, and other taxa. Various types of molecular
genetic markers can find in the eukaryotic genome, such as microsatellite (MS),
single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), restriction fragment length polymorphism
(RFLP), and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers have been
developed and utilized in population genetic studies. In addition, DNA profiling
methods, which are based on the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) [1] are independent with environmental factors,
can provide more accurate and useful information for the genomic evidence.MS markers are typically genotyped by PCR amplification, followed by the
determination of allele size by either gel electrophoresis or capillary
electrophoresis, which involves laser-based detection of fluorescence dye modified
oligonucleotides [2]. MS markers have also
been demonstrated to be useful for estimating genetic relatedness and diversity in
several livestock species including, cattle, sheep, and chickens, particularly in
indigenous breeds, inbred strains, and commercial lines [3-6]. Based on
their degree of polymorphism and genome coverage, several MS markers have been
recommended by the Measurement of Domestic Animal Diversity (MoDAD) for application
in diversity studies [7]. Various population
genetic parameters have been described to measure genetic variation within and among
populations using MS markers, including observed (Ho) and expected heterozygosity
(He), polymorphic information content (PIC), number of alleles (Na) and allele
richness per locus, genetic distance, and phylogeny. Simple and affordable
genotyping methods and analytical tools offering easy interpretation have led to the
extensive application of MS markers in genetic diversity studies to implements the
conservation program for various native chicken breeds.In 1980, the Yeonsan Ogye (YO) chicken was designated a natural monument of Korea
(no. 265). YO is characterized by black feathers, skin, bones, eyes, and crest.
Among native chicken breeds in South Korea, YO has very low economic value, owing to
its slow breeding potential and hatching rate. However, the importance of YO as a
natural cultural asset must be considered. Korea’s Cultural Heritage
Administration has established guidelines to maintain a population of at least 1,000
YOchickens to prevent its extinction. To maintain genetic heterogeneity, it is
essential to prevent inbreeding depression. Previous genomic analyses have shown
that the YO population has maintained its genetic diversity and a suitable
inbreeding coefficient despite the absence of a systematic management system.
However, the current YO breeding group possesses no pedigree information to maintain
a conservation population of over 1,000 animals via natural mating and artificial
hatching. In each generation, male and female birds were selected based on the
phenotypic traits (qualitative measures) such as completely black color for feather,
comb, and shank, without considering their genetic diversity or the inbreeding
ratio. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a breeding system for YO population
that prevents inbreeding depression likely happen in the future and to maintain
genetic diversity. Such efforts may prevent the loss of this nationally important YO
genetic resource. This study aimed to assess the genetic diversity of current YO
population and find the optimal number of clusters (the groups of birds that differ
by genetic distance, and have low relatedness) using 19 polymorphic microsatellite
(MS) markers and to construct a pedigree-based breeding plan for the YO
population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sample collection and DNA extraction
In the present study, a complete sample strategy was implemented to collect the
sample of YO population maintained at a private farm in Nonsan city, Korea.
Approximately, 2 mL of whole blood samples were collected from 509 birds
(> 5 months old males and females) and were stored in tubes containing
ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) to prevent coagulation before DNA
extraction step. At the same time, all the birds were tagged with unique
electronic radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags and recorded to facilitate
the identification of each individual (Fig.
1). Blood samples were subjected to genomic DNA (gDNA) extraction
using the PrimePrep Genomic DNA Extraction Kit from Blood (Genet Bio, Daejeon,
Korea). To assess the quality of the extracted gDNA, its concentration and
purity were measured using a NanoDrop 2000c spectrophotometer. The extracted
gDNA samples were stored at –20°C until the experiment began.
Fig. 1.
Yeonsan Ogye (YO) chicken with radio-frequency identification (RFID)
tags on its legs.
Microsatellite marker amplification test and marker selection
Initially, a total of 19 highly polymorphic MS markers were tested to investigate
their polymorphic status in the YO breed. This set of markers were selected from
the list of MS markers recommended by Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO) and a previous study of Seo et al. [8]. Polymorphism level of 19 markers was initially evaluated
using single-plex PCR and agarose gel electrophoresis. Of these, 12 highly
polymorphic markers were selected for multiplex PCR and genotyping. The
3’ end of each marker was modified to add four types of fluorescent
substances (FAM, NED, VIC, and PET) for multiplex PCR and fragment analysis. To
confirm the genotype (Table 1), a single
PCR was also performed using HS Prime Taq Premix (Genet Bio) on YO test samples.
The following amplification conditions were used in each PCR amplification:
pre-denaturation at 95°C for 10 min, followed by denaturation, annealing,
and extension processes repeated 30 times at 95°C for 30 s, 60°C
for 30 s, and 72°C for 1 min, respectively, followed by a final extension
at 72°C for 60 min. Fragment sizes of the PCR amplification products was
then obtained by fragment analysis using the GeneScan-500 LIZ (Applied
Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) size standard marker and Genetic Analyzer
(GA)3730xl (Applied Biosystems). Allele size was assigned using the GeneMapper
ver. 3.7 software (Applied Biosystems).
Table 1.
Primer information for the 19 candidate microsatellite (MS)
markers
No
Marker
Chr
Dye
Primer
(5’-3’)
Allele size range
1
ADL0259
9
VIC
F
CTCATTGCAGAGGAAGTTCT
107–129
R
GTAATGGAGGATGCTCAGGT
2
ADL0268
1
FAM
F
CTCCACCCCTCTCAGAACTA
105–117
R
CAACTTCCCATCTACCTACT
3
ADL0293
17
NED
F
GTAATCTAGAAACCCCATCT
105–119
R
ACATACCGCAGTCTTTGTTC
4
ADL0304
18
NED
F
GGGGAGGAACTCTGGAAATG
137–159
R
CCTCATGCTTCGTGCTTTTT
5
ADL0317
4
FAM
F
AGTTGGTTTCAGCCATCCAT
178–204
R
CCCAGAGCACACTGTCACTG
6
GCT0016
9
PET
F
TCCAAGGTTCTCCAGTTC
109–125
R
GGCATAAGGATAGCAACAG
7
LEI0074
26
VIC
F
GACCTGGTCCTGACATGGGTG
224–240
R
GTTTGCTGATTAGCCATCGCG
8
LEI0094
4
VIC
F
GATCTCACCAGTATGAGCTGC
254–280
R
TCTCACACTGTAACACAGTGC
9
LEI0141
2
FAM
F
CGCATTTGATGCATAACACATG
220–242
R
AAGGCAAACTCAGCTGGAACG
10
MCW0029
5
PET
F
GTGGACACCCATTTGTACCCTATG
139–189
R
CATGCAATTCAGGACCGTGCA
11
MCW0087
2
FAM
F
ATTTCTGCAGCCAACTTGGAG
267–283
R
CTCAGGCAGTTCTCAAGAACA
12
MCW0104
13
NED
F
TAGCACAACTCAAGCTGTGAG
189–225
R
AGACTTGCACAGCTGTGTACC
13
MCW0123
14
FAM
F
CCACTAGAAAAGAACATCCTC
79–89
R
GGCTGATGTAAGAAGGGATGA
14
MCW0145
1
VIC
F
ACTTTATTCTCCAAATTTGGCT
181–211
R
AAACACAATGGCAACGGAAAC
15
MCW0228
10
PET
F
GATCTCTGCATTACAAGCATG
221–239
R
TTGCTGACCTGCTCATGCAAG
16
MCW0264
2
PET
F
CTTACTTTTCACGACAGAAGC
224–240
R
AGACTGAGTCACACTCGTAAG
17
MCW0330
17
NED
F
TGGACCTCATCAGTCTGACAG
254–286
R
AATGTTCTCATAGAGTTCCTGC
18
ROS0013
5
NED
F
TGCTGCTCCTGGRAAATTG
220–242
R
GAAAAGCCATGGAGGAATCA
19
ROS0083
13
VIC
F
CATTACAGCTCAGTGTTGGCA
109–129
R
TTGCAAGTGCTCTCCCATC
The bold markers are the selected 12 microsatellite markers for the
population study.
Chr, chromosome number; Dye, fluorescent dye.
The bold markers are the selected 12 microsatellite markers for the
population study.Chr, chromosome number; Dye, fluorescent dye.
Population genetic analyses and breeding plans
To obtain the genetic parameter for 12 MS markers, we performed basic
population-level statistical and genetic diversity analyses using the
‘adegenet’ package in the R software [9]. The total number of alleles, polymorphic
information content (PIC), Ho and He were calculated.Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) plot and phylogenetic tree analyses were
performed using individual genetic distance information derived using the
Euclidean distance method and genetic distances between clustered groups were
identified based on Nei’s standard genetic distance values obtained using
the ‘poppr’ R package [10], which can be represented as follows:Where pop1 and
pop2 are the allele
frequencies at the ith locus in populations 1 and 2, respectively.To obtain the genetic structure in current YO population (i.e., for optimal YO
group division), k-means clustering was performed using the
‘NbClust’ R software package, and the
obtained grouping information, and was heatmap analyzed using the
‘pheatmap’ R software package to visualize
the genetic distance between identified groups.To prepare a mating plan that will minimizes the inbreeding within the YO group,
the possible breeding groups were identify by cluster analysis and genetic
distance data.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
For effective management and conservation of YOchicken as a natural heritage, it is
necessary to separate breeding groups and maintain the pedigree by establishing an
all-in-all-out system for generation replacement. However, due to the lack of
pedigree and breeding record information of current YO population, we have
distinguished several groups of YO based on their genetic distance using genotype
information from 12 MS markers to establish an initial breeding plan.
Selection of highly polymorphic microsatellite markers for Yeonsan Ogye
population
A total of 19 MS markers were tested to identify highly polymorphic marker
combinations in YOchicken population. The 12 selected MS markers
(ADL0259, ADL0268,
ADL017, LEI0074, LEI0094,
LEI0141, MCW0029,
MCW0087, MCW0127, MCW0264,
MCW0330, and ROS0083) contained an average
of five alleles per locus. The Ho, He, and PIC of each marker in the YO
population are listed in Table 2.
Table 2.
Allele distribution, polymorphism information content (PIC), and
observed (Ho) and expected heterozygosity (He) of the 12 microsatellite
markers
Marker
Set
Identified allele
size
PIC
Ho
He
Allele number
ADL0259
1
107
109
111
113
127
0.549
0.595
0.617
5
ADL0268
2
102
108
110
112
114
0.736
0.727
0.773
5
ADL0317
1
182
186
188
196
198
0.308
0.389
0.356
5
LEI0074
2
227
229
235
237
239
243
0.684
0.715
0.727
6
LEI0094
1
252
262
264
266
278
282
0.686
0.766
0.734
6
LEI0141
2
222
230
234
244
0.623
0.251
0.686
4
MCW0029
2
149
151
161
163
181
185
187
0.650
0.697
0.693
7
MCW0087
1
267
271
273
277
281
283
0.726
0.633
0.767
6
MCW0123
1
80
86
90
0.479
0.544
0.541
3
MCW0264
2
230
232
238
240
244
0.403
0.448
0.487
5
MCW0330
1
268
276
286
0.496
0.536
0.587
3
ROS0083
2
109
117
119
123
129
0.691
0.760
0.730
5
The average PIC of the selected markers was 0.586, and the average He was 0.642.
Hinderbrand et al. [11] reported that MS
markers with PIC > 0.5 and He > 0.6 are suitable for population
genetic studies. Thus, all the selected markers except ADL0317
(PIC ≥ 0.4) had sufficient PIC for individual identification and lineage
classification in the YO population. Two markers, ADL0268 and
MCW0087 had exceptionally high PIC levels, of 7.0 or
higher.The markers selected in this study had higher Ho and He values than those
identified in a previous study that have used 25 MS markers [12]. However, these results may have caused
by the relatively large number of samples used (509 samples), compared with the
previous study (27 samples). Notably, the combination of markers selected in
this study provides sufficient polymorphism to distinguish individuals and
breeds with a relatively small number of markers. Since all 12 markers were
included in previous genetic diversity analysis of eight chicken varieties
[13], we can indirectly infer the
genetic distance and relationship between Ogye and various other chicken breeds
in Korea. Choi et al. [13] analyzed the
genotypes of 20–30 chickens in different chicken groups including hybrid
population to obtain a combination of 12 markers with PIC > 0.7 and a
very low probability of identity (PI). These results are consistent with the
findings of the present study, suggesting that our 12 selected markers may be
sufficient for explaining genetic diversity and distances within the YO
population.
Diversity and clustering analyses using 12 microsatellite markers
The result of MDS analysis confirmed that all birds were evenly distributed,
without bias. This finding was expected because the samples used in this study
were obtained exclusively from one large population. Therefore, these chickens
have shared the common alleles (Fig.
2).
Fig. 2.
Multi-dimensional scaling analysis results obtained using 12 selected
microsatellite markers, indicating no clear differentiation among
birds.
To design a breeding plan that minimizes inbreeding in a population without
existing lineage information, it is important to calculate genetic distances
using genotype information, and mating birds from different groups that
identified to have relatively far genetic distance, while maintaining a new
lineage record. Allele frequency for each bird and group is calculated to
determine the genetic distance among each bird and group [14]. We performed a k-means clustering analysis to
determine the optimal number of YO groups using genotype information obtained
from the selected MS markers. By gradually increasing the number of clusters
from 2 to 15, we determined the optimal number of groups with the smallest
within-group variance and the largest between-group variance. This analysis
results showed that the optimal k-value of YO groups was three (Fig. 3). In addition, based on the MDS, and
phylogenetic tree analysis results, we further determined that the YO population
could be separated into three groups (Figs.
4 and 5). These results imply
that the YOchicken population is maintained as three ancestral groups. However,
each group maintained a similar and close genetic distance from 0.16 to 0.17,
and within the group, the genetic distance was very close with an average of
0.694, confirmed that their genetic similarities were high.
Fig. 3.
K-means cluster analysis of the YO population.
The best fitted cluster was k = 3 value. YO, Yeonsan Ogye.
Fig. 4.
The results for the phylogenetic tree analysis using YO
population.
This indicates three populations can be identified in this population.
pop, populations; YO, Yeonsan Ogye.
Fig. 5.
MDS plots for K = 3 (A) and K = 5 (B) groups in the YO
population.
Each group is identified by the shape and color of the spot. pop,
populations; MDS, multi-dimensional scaling; YO, Yeonsan Ogye.
K-means cluster analysis of the YO population.
The best fitted cluster was k = 3 value. YO, Yeonsan Ogye.
The results for the phylogenetic tree analysis using YO
population.
This indicates three populations can be identified in this population.
pop, populations; YO, Yeonsan Ogye.
MDS plots for K = 3 (A) and K = 5 (B) groups in the YO
population.
Each group is identified by the shape and color of the spot. pop,
populations; MDS, multi-dimensional scaling; YO, Yeonsan Ogye.If the YO population is divided based on the three suggested groups (with lowest
within-group variance and highest between-group variance), the genetic distance
between the suggested groups did not much differ as indicated in the Fig. 6A, suggest that mating among
three-ancestry groups would not be effective and sustainable. Furthermore, it is
very difficult to maintain a sufficient number of generations for future
replacement by keeping only three groups which may also lead to high inbreeding
and low genetic diversity in the future.
Fig. 6.
Heatmap of genetic distances using 3 and 5 groups in the YO
population.
Blue and red indicate closer and farther genetic distances, respectively.
pop, populations; YO, Yeonsan Ogye.
Heatmap of genetic distances using 3 and 5 groups in the YO
population.
Blue and red indicate closer and farther genetic distances, respectively.
pop, populations; YO, Yeonsan Ogye.These limitations can be overcome by either increasing number of ancestry group
or immigration. In the context of increasing ancestry group, we try to increase
the number of ancestry groups up to 5 (k = 5) and analyses the genetic distance
between groups. As summarized in heatmap in Figs.
5B, 6B, and 7 the genetic distance between groups was varied and range
between 0.119 (pop1 vs pop2) and 0.261 (pop1 vs pop3). It was clear that the
increasing number of groups possibly result in more genetically distant ancestry
populations. Maintaining a sufficient number of the breeding groups at the
initial stage is more important as it provides several options to decide the
breeding groups to maintain the effective breeding plan. Having five base
populations would be sufficient to increase the number of breeding groups that
possess genetically distal birds. Rotational breeding among these five groups is
more effective instead of keeping only three groups with low genetic
distance.
Fig. 7.
Represent MDS plot of K = 5 groups with additional
dimensions.
(A) Clustering of 5 groups at dimension 1 and 2, (B) clustering of 5
groups at dimension 1 and 3, and (C) clustering of 5 groups at dimension
1 and 4. pop, populations; MDS, multi-dimensional scaling; YO, Yeonsan
Ogye.
Represent MDS plot of K = 5 groups with additional
dimensions.
(A) Clustering of 5 groups at dimension 1 and 2, (B) clustering of 5
groups at dimension 1 and 3, and (C) clustering of 5 groups at dimension
1 and 4. pop, populations; MDS, multi-dimensional scaling; YO, Yeonsan
Ogye.In general, inbreeding has been reported to have a greater impact on population
extinct than natural selection. In addition, inbreeding reduces the
heterogeneity of the population and increases homozygosity, making it
susceptible to recessive genetic diseases. The heterogeneity of a specific
population becomes a measure of genetic diversity, and it is essential to
maintain the population by adapting to various environmental changes and
hereditary diseases. However, YO has been continued strong selection to maintain
its unique appearance as a natural monument while maintaining a closed chicken
population. In an environment where pedigrees are not recorded, the influence of
phenotypic selections can have a great influence on the gene pool, and there is
a possibility that the appearance selection of a certain standard may cause
inbreeding by selecting only a single ancestry group. Our recent study of Major
Histocompatibility Complex B region variation showed that YO population maintain
in National Institute of Animal Science (NIAS) has unique genetic variation
compare to other chicken populations [15]. MHC-B linked microsatellite marker LEI0258 diversity in the present
study population showed that they have 9 alleles with varied frequencies
(unpublished data). Keeping a diverse population will be improved the adaptive
genetic variation and benefits their immunogenetic capacity to respond to the
diseases in a free-range production system.Therefore, this study provided sufficient information to understand the current
genetic diversity of the YO population and the number of ancestry groups that
can be used to increase or maintain the diverse population for future
improvement.Fortunately, 20–30 years ago, when the restoration project of Korean
native chicken was being carried out, some groups of YO were delivered to Seoul
National University and the National Institute of Animal Science in Chungbuk,
Chungnam, and Gyeongbuk to maintain the purebred population. According to Roh et
al. [12], each of these Ogye populations
has the same phenotypic characteristics but different genetic diversity due to
different population size and breeding strategies. Whereas the Gyeongbuk
population is different from the other three populations because this population
might be maintained as a crossbred despite their similar phenotypic
characteristics. In particular, there is a difference between the four groups of
YO that was not strongly selected by their appearance. Investigating the genetic
diversity of these populations may find new ancestry groups to find clues that
could increase genetic diversity. In addition, It has been reported that
crossbreeding between genetically close lineages can alleviate the increase in
effective population size and inbreeding [16]. Thus, as a second strategy, mutual exchange of population for
breeding and effectively population management would be a successful
conservation strategy for the YOchicken population.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study indicate that 12 MS markers represent a viable approach for
determining genetic diversity and provide basic information for preparing a pedigree
to establish an appropriate YO breeding plan. Based on genetic distances, we have
identified three clusters of YOchickens and further divided into five clusters to
implement the systematic breeding plan, in which rotational mating between these
clusters is considered more favorable due to their different genetic distance. To
sustain the unique phenotypic characteristics of YOchickens as a national monument
of Korea, it also is necessary to consider the genetic information of individual
birds in each breeding group and possible exchange of breeding materials among the
available resource populations.
Authors: Nu Ri Choi; Dong Won Seo; Slim Ben Jemaa; Hasina Sultana; Kang Nyeong Heo; Cheorun Jo; Jun Heon Lee Journal: J Anim Sci Technol Date: 2015-02-05
Authors: D W Seo; M R Hoque; N R Choi; H Sultana; H B Park; K N Heo; B S Kang; H T Lim; S H Lee; C Jo; J H Lee Journal: Asian-Australas J Anim Sci Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 2.509