| Literature DB >> 35592093 |
Ruei-Syuan Wu1, Hsu-Chang Wang2, Chan Liang Su3, Pei-Hwa Wang1, En-Chung Lin1.
Abstract
Pedigree analysis was performed in three major Taiwanese swine breeds to evaluate the genetic variability in the current population and determine the main reason for genetic diversity (GD) loss after the occurrence of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) in Taiwan. The pedigree files of the Duroc, Landrace, and Yorkshire breeds, containing 60,237, 87,177, and 34,373 records, respectively, were analyzed. We divided the population into two subpopulations (pre-1998 and post-1998) to determine the role of FMD in GD loss. Pedigree completeness and related indicators were analyzed to evaluate the pedigree quality, and several parameters were used to measure the levels of GD and further used to determine the major cause of GD loss. The pedigree completeness indexes for the different breeds were higher than 0.60, and the trend was enhanced after the FMD outbreak. The estimated proportion of random genetic drift in GD loss increased in all breeds over time (from 62.64% to 78.44% in Duroc; from 26.26% to 57.99% in Landrace; and from 47.97% to 55.00% in Yorkshire, respectively). The effective population size of Duroc and Landrace were increased by the time (Duroc: from 61.73 to 84.75; Landrace: from 108.70 to 113.64); however, it shows opposite trend in Yorkshire population (decline from 86.21 to 50.00). In summary, the occurrence of FMD led to the major loss of GD loss by random genetic drift. Therefore, for the recovery of GD, breeders in Taiwan should increase the effective population size with newly imported genetic materials and adjust the breeding strategy to reduce the inbreeding rate.Entities:
Keywords: genetic diversity; pedigree; random genetic drift; swine
Year: 2022 PMID: 35592093 PMCID: PMC9113419 DOI: 10.1093/tas/txac043
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Anim Sci ISSN: 2573-2102
Figure 1.Number of pigs born and farm per year.
Figure 2.Number of pigs born within different swine breeds per year.
Basic description of pedigree datasets, and the parameters of pedigree completeness and inbreeding analysis for all breeds.
| Breed | Duroc | Landrace | Yorkshire | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| subpopulation | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 |
| No. of animals in whole population | 32,858 | 27,379 | 51,263 | 35,914 | 22,964 | 11,409 |
| No. of animals in reference population | 4,534 | 2,871 | 8,766 | 3,402 | 3,688 | 1,083 |
| No. of Inbred animals | 3,367 | 2,623 | 3,657 | 2,278 | 1,531 | 666 |
| Inbred animals, % | 74.26 | 91.36 | 41.71 | 66.96 | 41.51 | 61.49 |
| Pedigree Completeness Index, % | 0.83 | 0.86 | 0.64 | 0.73 | 0.61 | 0.69 |
| Maximum generations traced | 17 | 17 | 15 | 16 | 16 | 15 |
| Mean equivalent generations | 3.50 | 3.46 | 2.43 | 2.63 | 2.36 | 2.23 |
| Complete generations | 7 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| % known ancestors in: | ||||||
| 1st generation | 92.9 | 96.7 | 92.0 | 91.3 | 90.7 | 88.1 |
| 2nd generation | 85.6 | 91.0 | 72.5 | 82.2 | 70.7 | 77.4 |
| 4th generation | 73.5 | 74.8 | 43.6 | 54.8 | 34.4 | 49.3 |
| Mean | 4.24 | 3.62 | 1.37 | 1.76 | 1.86 | 2.77 |
| Δ | 0.81 | 0.59 | 0.45 | 0.43 | 0.58 | 1.00 |
|
| 61.73 | 84.75 | 108.70 | 113.64 | 86.21 | 50.00 |
Inbred animals, the animals with F > 0; Mean F, average inbreeding coefficient of all animals in reference population.
ΔF, the increase in inbreeding of all animals in reference population; N, effective population size.
Average generation intervals in evaluated breeds.
| Breed | Duroc | Landrace | Yorkshire | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| subpopulation | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 |
| Average generation interval | 2.17 | 2.43 | 2.30 | 2.63 | 2.28 | 2.60 |
| GI for sire–son path | 2.20 | 2.66 | 2.20 | 2.96 | 2.21 | 2.78 |
| GI for sire–daughter path | 2.19 | 2.43 | 2.17 | 2.58 | 2.19 | 2.56 |
| GI for dam–son path | 2.13 | 2.33 | 2.31 | 2.62 | 2.34 | 2.52 |
| GI for dam–daughter path | 2.16 | 2.41 | 2.43 | 2.64 | 2.38 | 2.61 |
GI, generation interval.
Parameters derived from the probability of gene origin in the different reference populations in each breed.
| Breed | Duroc | Landrace | Yorkshire | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| subpopulation | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 | Pre-1998 | Post-1998 |
| Total number of founders, | 1378 | 1049 | 2921 | 1393 | 1494 | 515 |
| Effective number of founders, | 174 | 167 | 457 | 169 | 369 | 80 |
| Founder genome equivalent, | 65 | 36 | 337 | 71 | 192 | 36 |
|
| 0.13 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.12 | 0.25 | 0.16 |
|
| 0.37 | 0.22 | 0.74 | 0.42 | 0.52 | 0.45 |
| Number of ancestors to explain: | ||||||
| 50% of gene pool | 56 | 35 | 150 | 42 | 105 | 22 |
| 75% of gene pool | 169 | 103 | 415 | 133 | 295 | 74 |
| 100% of gene pool | 1143 | 680 | 2598 | 1042 | 1255 | 350 |
| GD | 0.992 | 0.986 | 0.999 | 0.993 | 0.997 | 0.986 |
| 1 − GD (GD loss) | 0.008 | 0.014 | 0.001 | 0.007 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Proportion of unequal contributions of the founders in GD loss | 37.36 | 21.56 | 73.74 | 42.01 | 52.03 | 45.00 |
| Proportion of random genetic drift in GD loss | 62.64 | 78.44 | 26.26 | 57.99 | 47.97 | 55.00 |
GD, genetic diversity; The equation of GD calculation is .
Figure 3.Accumulated marginal contribution of 100 major ancestors in the Taiwan swine breeds. (a) Duroc breed; (b) Landrace breed; (c) Yorkshire breed.