Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Genetic diversity and phylogenetic relationship analyzed by microsatellite markers in eight Indonesian local duck populations

  • Hariyono, Dwi Nur Happy (Department of Animal Breeding and Reproduction, Faculty of Animal Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada) ;
  • Maharani, Dyah (Department of Animal Breeding and Reproduction, Faculty of Animal Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada) ;
  • Cho, Sunghyun (Division of Animal and Dairy Science, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Manjula, Prabuddha (Division of Animal and Dairy Science, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Seo, Dongwon (Division of Animal and Dairy Science, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Choi, Nuri (Division of Animal and Dairy Science, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Sidadolog, Jafendi Hasoloan Purba (Department of Animal Breeding and Reproduction, Faculty of Animal Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada) ;
  • Lee, Jun-Heon (Division of Animal and Dairy Science, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chungnam National University)
  • Received : 2018.01.17
  • Accepted : 2018.05.22
  • Published : 2019.01.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: At least eight local duck breeds have been recognized and documented as national germplasm of Indonesia so far. It is necessary to genetically characterize the local duck breeds for aiding conservation and future improvement strategies. Thus, this study was carried out to assess genetic diversity and phylogenetic relationship of eight local duck populations of Indonesia using microsatellite markers. Methods: In total, 240 individuals (30 individuals each population) from Alabio (AL), Bayang (BY), Magelang (MG), Mojosari (MJ), Pegagan (PG), Pitalah (PT), Rambon (RM), and Turi (TR) duck populations were genotyped using 22 microsatellite markers. Results: The results showed a moderate level of genetic diversity among populations, with a total of 153 alleles detected over all loci and populations, ranging from 3 to 22 alleles per locus. Observed (Ho) and expected heterozygosity (He), as well as polymorphism information content over all loci and populations were 0.440, 0.566, and 0.513, respectively. Heterozygote deficiency in the overall populations ($F_{IT}=0.237$), was partly due to the heterozygote deficiency within populations ($F_{IS}=0.114$) and moderate level of genetic differentiation among populations ($F_{ST}=0.137$). The most diverse population was MG (He = 0.545) and the least diverse population was AL (He = 0.368). The majority of populations were relatively in heterozygote deficiency (except AL), due to inbreeding. The genetic distances, phylogenetic trees, and principal coordinates analysis concluded that the populations can be grouped into two major clusters, resulting AL, MG, and MJ in one cluster separated from the remaining populations. Conclusion: The present study revealed a considerable genetic diversity of studied populations and thus, proper management strategies should be applied to preserve genetic diversity and prevent loss of alleles.

Keywords

References

  1. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). Coping with climate change-the roles of genetic resources for food and agriculture. Rome, Italy: FAO; 2015.
  2. Vaarst M, Steenfeldt S, Horsted K. Sustainable development perspectives of poultry production. Worlds Poult Sci J 2015;71: 609-20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933915002433
  3. Li JY, Chen H, Lan XY, Kong XJ, Min LJ. Genetic diversity of five Chinese goat breeds assesed by microsatellite markers. Czech J Anim Sci 2008;53:315-9. https://doi.org/10.17221/347-CJAS
  4. Simaei-Soltani L, Abdolmohammadi A, Zebarjadi A, Foroutanifar S. Genetic diversity and distance of Iranian goat breeds (Markhoz, Mahabadi and Lori) compared to the Beetal breed using inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) markers. Arch Anim Breed 2016;59:477-83. https://doi.org/10.5194/aab-59-477-2016
  5. Bao WB, Shu JT, Musa HH, Chen GH. Analysis of pairwise genetic distance and its relation with geographical distance of 15 Chinese chicken breeds. Int J Trop Med 2007;2:107-12.
  6. Estoup A, Presa P, Krieg F, Vaiman D, Guyomard R. $(CT)_n$ and $(GT)_n$ microsatellites: a new class of genetic markers for Salmo trutta L. (brown trout). Heredity 1993;71:488-96. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1993.167
  7. Moria BS, Permana GN, Hutapea JH. Characterization of three microsatellite loci of Yellow Fin tuna, Thunnus albacares eggs and larvae. J Fish Sci 2009;11:144-9.
  8. Wright JM, Bentzen P. Microsatellites: genetic markers for the future. In: Carvalho GR, Pitcher TJ, editors. Molecular genetics in fisheries. Dordrecht, The Netherlands; Springer; 1995. p. 117-21.
  9. Abdul Muneer PM, Gopalakrishnan A, Musammilu KK, et al. Comparative assessment of genetic variability in the populations of endemic and endangered Yellow Catfish, Horabagrus brachysoma (Teleostei: Horabagridae), based on allozyme, RAPD, and microsatellite markers. Biochem Genet 2012;50:192-212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10528-011-9462-4
  10. Liu W, Hou ZC, Qu LJ, et al. Population structure and biodiversity of Chinese indigenous duck breeds revealed by 15 microsatellite markers. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2008;21:314-9. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2008.70100
  11. Gaur U, Tantia MS, Mishra B, et al. Population structuring of land and coastal ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) using microsatellite markers. Curr Sci 2016;110:1977-83. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v110/i10/1977-1983
  12. Seo D, Bhuiyan MSA, Sultana H, Heo JM, Lee JH. Genetic diversity analysis of South and East Asian duck populations using highly polymorphic microsatellite markers. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2016;29:471-8. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0915
  13. Sultana H, Seo D, Choi NR, et al. Genetic diversity analysis of Asian duck populations using 24 microsatellite markers. Korean J Poult Sci 2017;44:75-81. https://doi.org/10.5536/KJPS.2017.44.2.75
  14. Ismoyowati, Purwantini D. Genetic variability of Bali and Alabio ducks on the basis of phenotypic and microsatellites. Asian J Poult Sci 2011;5:107-15. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajpsaj.2011.107.115
  15. Rusfidra, Heryandi Y, Jamsari, Rahman EY. Variasi genetik Itik Bayang berbasis marka mikrosatelit pada lokus AY287 dan lokus AY283. Sains Peternakan 2013;11:91-8.
  16. Rahayu A, Purwantini D, Maharani, D, Hartatik T. Single nucleotide polymorphism identification and genotyping analysis of Melanocortin 1 receptor gene in various plumage colours in Magelang ducks. Int J Poult Sci 2015;14:207-12. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2015.207.212
  17. Marshall TC, Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Pemberton JM. Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol Ecol 1998;7:639-55. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-294x.1998.00374.x
  18. Peakall R, Smouse PE. GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and reasearch - an update. Bioinformatics 2012;28:2537-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts460
  19. Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. MEGA7: Molecular evolutionary genetic analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol Biol Evol 2016;33:1870-4. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msw054
  20. Botstein D, White RL, Skolnik M, Davis RW. Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Am J Hum Genet 1980;32:314-31.
  21. MacHugh DE, Shriver MD, Loftus RT, Cunningham P, Bradley DG. Microsatellite DNA variation and the evolution, domestication and phylogeography of taurine and zebu cattle (Bos taurus and Bos indicus). Genetics 1997;146:1071-86. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/146.3.1071
  22. Nei M. Genetic distances between population. Am Nat 1972; 106:283-92. https://doi.org/10.1086/282771

Cited by

  1. Marginal diversity analysis of conservation of Chinese domestic duck breeds vol.9, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-49652-6
  2. Genassemblage 2.0 software facilitates conservation of genetic variation of captively propagated species vol.10, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74683-9