برآورد اندازه مؤثر جمعیت گوسفند نژاد سنگسری با استفاده از روش‌های مختلف مبتنی بر تجزیه و تحلیل شجره

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی- ژنتیک و اصلاح دام و طیور

نویسندگان

دانشگاه تبریز

چکیده

اندازه مؤثر جمعیت به علت رابطه مستقیم با نرخ افزایش همخونی و همچنین میزان کاهش تنوع ژنتیکی حاصل از رانش ژنتیکی، یکی از فراسنجه‌های مهم در ژنتیک جمعیت و حفظ ذخایر ژنتیکی به‌شمار می‌رود. در این تحقیق از اطلاعات شجره‌ای گوسفندان نژاد سنگسری که طی 27 سال (1394-1368) در ایستگاه پرورش و اصلاح نژاد شهرستان دامغان جمع‌آوری شده بود جهت برآورد اندازه مؤثر جمعیت با استفاده از شش روش مختلف استفاده گردید. در این روش‌ها از منابع اطلاعاتی مختلفی چون تعداد والدین نر و ماده در هر سال، نرخ افزایش همخونی بین دام‌ها و والدین آنها، نرخ افزایش همخونی بین دام‌ها و نسل قبلی آنها، نرخ افزایش ضریب خویشاوندی افزایشی، ضریب رگرسیون همخونی بر سال تولد و افزایش همخونی فردی جهت برآورد اندازه مؤثر جمعیت استفاده گردید. برآوردهای به‌دست آمده توسط روش‌های مختلف با هم متفاوت بوده و از 41 تا 8369 رأس متغیر بود. بهترین روش با توجه به برخی معیارها همچون بازه زمانی مورد استفاده، آزمون تشکیل یا عدم تشکیل زیرجمعیت‌ها، پایایی برآوردها و عدم برآورد منفی برای اندازه مؤثر جمعیت انتخاب گردید. با در نظر گرفتن معیارهای مورد نیاز، برآوردهای حاصل از روش افزایش همخونی فردی به‌عنوان بهترین برآورد از اندازه مؤثر جمعیت در این شجره انتخاب گردید. میانگین اندازه مؤثر جمعیت برآورد شده با استفاده از این روش 131 رأس بود. با توجه به بسته بودن این گله اصلاح نژادی و عددم ورود دام از دیگر گله‌ها، به‌کارگیری روش‌هایی جهت جلوگیری از کاهش اندازه مؤثر جمعیت همچون استفاده از روش مشارکت بهینه والدین توصیه می‌گردد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Estimating the Effective Population Size of Sangsari Sheep Using Different Methods Based on Pedigree Analysis

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammadreza Sheikhlou
  • Einollah Abdi Ghezeljeh
  • Rashid Safari
  • Zabihollah Nemati
University of Tabriz
چکیده [English]

Introduction: The practices that make breeding programs effective in generating genetic gain results the reduction in genetic diversity. The loss of diversity and the resulting increase in homozygosity may result in decreased production and fitness of inbred animals. One of the important parameters in assessing the level of genetic diversity of population is effective population size. Effective population size is a key parameter in population and conservation genetics due to its direct relationship with the rate of inbreeding and the amount of genetic variation lost because of random genetic drift. As a consequence, effective population size is usually considered as a useful criterion for classifying the livestock breeds according to the degree of endangerment. Classically, effective population size can be estimated from the rate of inbreeding between two successive generations. However, in real populations with overlapping generations, the definition of a ‘previous’ generation is quite difficult to establish and assignment of animals to various generations is not simple. A number of methods are available to estimate the effective population size on the basis of pedigree in livestock populations. However, when it comes to monitoring animal genetic resources not all methods are equally well suited and depending on the conditions in the population under consideration, different methods may have to be chosen. The objective of this study was to estimate effective population size in the breeding flock of sangsari sheep using different methods and to select the best estimates among them according to the pedigree structure.
Material and Methods: In this study the pedigree information of Sangsari sheep collected in 28 years (1988-2015) at breeding station of Damghan were used to estimate effective population size. The quality of available pedigree information is of great importance when interpreting the results of pedigree analysis. Thus, the degree of completeness of pedigree was assessed before analysis. For the whole file, the proportion of animals with both parents known was computed by simple counting. The pedigree completeness index (PCI) was used to describe the degree of completeness of pedigree. In addition, for each individual, the number of equivalent complete generations (EqG) was computed. Effective population size was estimated using the six different methods. The best method was selected considering some criteria such as time period used, subpopulation stratification, stability of estimates and negative estimate for effective population size.
Results and Discussion: The proportion of animals from the whole file with two known parents was 70%. The completeness of pedigree was low in the early years of the foundation of the center, however, pedigree filling improved over time, with the most recent cohort of lambs having pedigree completeness index of 0.61 and equivalent complete generations of 4.1. Accordingly, the pedigree had an acceptable completeness level for estimation of the effective population size. Estimates for effective population size were different according to the methods used for estimation. Estimated effective population size from and Ne-Coan resulted negative values for some years in the time period of last generation interval, which is clearly meaningless and leads to the rejection of these estimates. Another criteria for choosing the best method is the variability of estimates that should be as small as possible. Here, we consider the square root of the residual after fitting a linear regression to the yearly Ne estimates that should not be greater than 20. In all methods this criteria was greater than the critical value (20) except for the methods Ne-Cens and Ne-Ecg, and Ne-Ecg has the smaller value between the methods. Considering the necessary criteria, estimates from the method of individual increase in inbreeding (Ne-Ecg) were chosen as the best estimates for effective population size in this pedigree. Average estimated effective population size using this method was 131 animals.
Conclusion: Estimated realized effective population size was greater than the critical levels reported by FAO (50) and Meuwissen (100). Also, the estimated effective population size in this study was in the range of estimates for some foreign and Iranian sheep breeds. Considering the closed nucleus with no entry of animals from other herds, implementation of methods for preventing the losses of effective population size in the future such as optimum contribution of parents is suggested.

Material and Methods: In this study the pedigree information of Sangsari sheep collected in 28 year (1988-2015) at breeding station of Damghan were used to estimate effective population size. The quality of available pedigree information is of great importance when interpreting the results of pedigree analysis. Thus, the degree of completeness of pedigree was assessed before analysis. For the whole file, the proportion of animals with both parents known was computed by simple counting. The pedigree completeness index (PCI) proposed by MacCluer et al. (1983) was used to describe the degree of completeness of pedigree:
〖PCI〗_animal=(2C_sire C_dam)/(C_sire+C_dam )
Where Csire and Cdam are contributions from the paternal and maternal lines respectively: C=1/d ∑_(i=1)^d▒a_i
Where ai is the proportion of known ancestors in generation i; and d is the number of generations that is taken into account. In addition, for each individual, the number of equivalent complete generations (EqG) was computed as the sum of (1/2)n , where n is the number of generations separating the individual to each known ancestor (Maignel et al., 1996). Effective population size was estimated using the six different methods. The best method was selected considering some criteria such as time period used, subpopulation stratification, stability of estimates and negative estimate for effective population size.
Results and Discussion: The proportion of animals from the whole file with two known parents was 70%. The evolution of the pedigree completeness index (PCI) and equivalent complete generations (EqG) of animals in the studied years are given in Figuer 1. The completeness of pedigree was low in the early years of the foundation of the centre, however, pedigree filling improved over time, with the most recent cohort of lambs having pedigree completeness index of 0.61 and equivalent complete generations of 4.1. Accordingly, the pedigree have an acceptable completeness level for estimation of the effective population size. Table 3 shows the actual estimates of effective population size for the years in last generation interval using different methods. Estimates for effective population size were different according to the methods used for estimation. According to the Table 3, estimated effective population size from N_e -ΔF_p and Ne-Coan resulted negative values for some years in the time period of last generation interval, which is clearly meaningless and leads to the rejection of these estimates. Another criteria for choosing the best method is the variability of estimates that should be small as possible. Here, we have chosen the square root of the residual after fitting a linear regression to the yearly Ne estimates that should not be greater than 20 (7). According to the Table 3 in all methods this criteria were greater than the critical value (20) except for the methods Ne-Cens and Ne-Ecg, and Ne-Ecg has the smaller value between the methods. Considering the necessary criteria, estimates from the method of individual increase in inbreeding (Ne-Ecg) were chosen as the best estimates for effective population size in this pedigree. Average estimated effective population size using this method was 131 animals.
Conclusion: Estimated realized effective population size was greater than the critical levels reported by FAO (50) and Meuwissen (100). Also, the estimated effective population size in this study was in the range of estimates for some foreign and Iranian sheep breeds. Considering the closed nucleus with no entry of animals from other herds, implementation of methods for preventing the losses of effective population size in the future such as optimum contribution of parents are suggested.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Effective population size
  • Inbreeding
  • Pedigree analysis
  • Sangsari Sheep
1. Bartolome, E., F. Goyache, A. Molina, I. Cervantes, M. Valera, and J.P. Gutierrez. 2010. Pedigree estimation of the (sub) population contribution to the total gene diversity: the horse coat colour case. Animal, 4:867-870.
2. Berg, P., J. Nielsen, and M. K. Sørensen. 2006. EVA: realized and predicted optimal genetic contributions. Page 13-18 In Proc. 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
3. Cervantes, I., F. Goyache, A. Molina, M. Valera, and J. P. Gutierrez. 2011. Estimation of effective population size from the rate of coancestry in pedigreed populations. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 128:56-63.
4. Cervantes, I., F. Goyache, A. Molina, M. Valera, and J.P. Gutierrez. 2008. Application of individual increase in inbreeding to estimate realized effective sizes from real pedigrees. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 125:301-310.
5. Danchin-Burge, C., S. J. Hiemstra, and H. Blackburn. 2011. Ex situ conservation of Holstein-Friesian cattle: comparing the Dutch, French, and US germplasm collections. Journal of Dairy Science, 94:4100-4108.
6. Danchin-Burge, C., I. Palhière, D. François, B. Bibe, G. Leroy, and E. Verrier. 2010. Pedigree analysis of seven small French sheep populations and implications for the management of rare breeds. Journal of Animal Science, 88:505-516.
7. Falconer, D.S., and T.F.C. Mackay. 1996. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Longman Group Ltd., Edinburgh.
8. FAO. 2007. The State of World’s Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. United states Food and Agriculture Organization.
9. FAO. 2013. In vivo conservation of animal genetic resources. FAO Animal Production and Health Guidelines. No. 14. Rome.
10. Frankham, R., D. A. Briscoe, J. D. Ballou, and D. A. Briscoe. 2002. Introduction to Conservation Genetics. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
11. Franklin, I., and R. Frankham. 1988. How large must populations be to retin evolutionary potential? Animal Conservation, 1:69-70.
12. Groeneveld, E., B. D. Westhuizen, A. Maiwashe, F. Voordewind, and J. B. Ferraz. 2009. POPREP: a generic report for population management. Genetic and Molicular Research, 8:1158-1178.
13. Groeneveld, L. F., J. A. Lenstra, H. Eding, M. A. Toro, B. Scherf, D. Pilling, R. Negrini, E. K. Finlay, H. Jianlin, E. Groeneveld, and S. Weigend. 2010. Genetic diversity in farm animals - A review. Animal Genetics, 41:6-31.
14. Gutierrez, J. P., I. Cervantes, and F. Goyache. 2009. Improving the estimation of realized effective population sizes in farm animals. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 126:327-332.
15. Gutierrez, J. P., I. Cervantes, A. Molina, M. Valera, and F. Goyache. 2008. Individual increase in inbreeding allows estimating effective sizes from pedigrees. Genetic Selection Evolution, 40:359-378.
16. Gutierrez, J. P., and F. Goyache. 2005. A note on ENDOG: A computer program for analysing pedigree information. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 122:172-176.
17. Koenig, S., and H. Simianer. 2006. Approaches to the management of inbreeding and relationship in the German Holstein dairy cattle population. Livestock Science, 103:40-53.
18. Leroy, G., T. Mary-Huard, E. Verrier, S. Danvy, E. Charvolin, and C. Danchin-Burge. 2013. Methods to estimate effective population size using pedigree data: Examples in dog, sheep, cattle and horse. Genetic Selection Evolution, 45:1-8.
19. Li, M. H., I. Stranden, and J. Kantanen. 2009. Genetic diversity and pedigree analysis of the Finnsheep breed. Journal of Animal Science, 87:1598-1605.
20. MacCluer, J. W., A. J. Boyce, B. Dyke, L. R. Weitkamp, D. W. Pfenning, and C. J. Parsons. 1983. Inbreeding and pedigree structure in Standardbred horses. Journal of Heredity, 74:394-399.
21. Maignel, L., D. Boichard, and E. Verrier. 1996. Genetic variability of French dairy breeds estimated from pedigree information. Interbull Buletin, 14:49-54.
22. Meuwissen, T. 1999. Operation of conservation schemes. Pages 91–112 in Genebanks and the Conservation of Farm Animal Genetic Resources, Lelystad, Netherlands.
23. Miraei-Ashtiani, S. R., S. A. R. Seyedalian, and M. Moradi Shahrbabak. 2007. Variance components and heritabilities for body weight traits in Sangsari sheep, using univariate and multivariate animal models. Small Ruminant Research, 73:109-114.
24. Mokhtari, M. S., M. M. Shahrbabak, A. K. Esmailizadeh, R. Abdollahi-Arpanahi, and J. P. Gutierrez. 2013. Genetic diversity in Kermani sheep assessed from pedigree analysis. Small Ruminant Research, 114:202-205.
25. Nomura, T., T. Honda, and F. Mukai. 2001. Inbreeding and effective population size of Japanese Black cattle. Journal of Animal Science, 79:366-370.
26. Norberg, E., and A. C. Sørensen. 2007. Inbreeding trend and inbreeding depression in the Danish populations of Texel, Shropshire, and Oxford Down. Journal of Animal Science, 85:299-304.
27. Perez-Enciso, M. 1995. Use of the uncertain relationship matrix to compute effective population size. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 112:327-332.
28. Pong-Wong, R., and J. a Woolliams. 2007. Optimisation of contribution of candidate parents to maximise genetic gain and restricting inbreeding using semidefinite programming. Genetic Selection Evolution, 39:3-25.
29. Sheikhlou, M., and M. A. Abbasi. 2016. Genetic diversity of Iranian Lori-Bakhtiari sheep assessed by pedigree analysis. Small Ruminant Research, 141:99-105.
30. Sørensen, A. C., M. K. Sørensen, and P. Berg. 2005. Inbreeding in Danish dairy cattle breeds. Journal of Dairy Science, 88:1865-1872.
31. Stachowicz, K., M. Sargolzaei, F. Miglior, and F. S. Schenkel. 2011. Rates of inbreeding and genetic diversity in Canadian Holstein and Jersey cattle. Journal of Dairy Science, 94:5160-75.
32. Taberlet, P., A. Valentini, H. R. Rezaei, S. Naderi, F. Pompanon, R. Negrini, and P. Ajmone-Marsan. 2008. Are cattle , sheep , and goats endangered species ? Molecular Ecology, 17:275-284.
33. Tahmoorespur, M., and M. Sheikhloo. 2011. Pedigree analysis of the closed nucleus of Iranian Baluchi sheep. Small Ruminant Research, 99:1-6.
34. Weigel, K. A. 2001. Controlling inbreeding in modern breeding programs. Journal of Dairy Science, 84:177-184.
35. Woolliams, J. A., P. Berg, B. S. Dagnachew, and T. H. E. Meuwissen. 2015. Genetic contributions and their optimization. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 132:89-99.
36. Wright, S. 1984. Evolution and the genetics of populations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.