Genetic diversity and bottleneck studies in endangered Bhutia and Manipuri pony breeds
- 293 Downloads
For studying the genetic diversity and bottleneck problem in Bhutia and Manipuri pony breeds of India, we analysed DNA samples of 34 Bhutia and 50 Manipuri, true to breed, ponies using 47 polymorphic microsatellite markers. All the microsatellites were observed to be highly polymorphic in nature in both Bhutia and Manipuri breeds with mean no. of alleles as 8.702 ± 0.0493 and 8.416 ± 0.0548 respectively. Genetic diversity values in terms of heterozygosity values within individual breeds were also high with very low inbreeding (Fis 0.102 and 0.055 in Bhutia and Manipuri ponies, respectively). Number of alleles in both the populations together ranged from 3 to 18 with an average of 10.851 ± 1.583 per locus. The mean effective number of alleles was observed to 5.34 ± 0.253. All loci except ASB017 and HTG004 showed high values of allele richness (>5.0). The mean observed and expected heterozygosities were 0.7159 ± 0.022, 0.7986 ± 0.011 (Levene’s) and 0.7936 ± 0.011 (Nei’s), respectively. The high mean values of heterozygosity indicated the presence of high genetic diversity in both the pony populations. The overall mean value of within-population inbreeding estimates (Fis) was low (0.101 ± 0.023) indicating low to moderate level of inbreeding. Bottleneck studies revealed that no recent bottleneck problem has taken place in both the populations. Both pony populations were found to be in mutation drift equilibrium. The study reveals that both the pony breeds have high diversity and timely action needs to be taken to conserve them.
KeywordsBhutia Manipuri pony breed Bottleneck Genetic diversity Microsatellite markers
The authors are thankful to the Director, National Research Centre on Equines, Hisar for providing necessary facilities for carrying out this study. Thanks are due to State Animal Husbandry Department, Manipur for their kind help in collection of blood samples. Thanks are also due to Dr. R. K.Vijh, Pr. Scientist, NBAGR, Karnal for help in data analysis and Dr. Carlos Garza, USA for valuable comments in this manuscript.
- 4.Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd edn. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring HarbourGoogle Scholar
- 9.Yeh FC, Boyle T, Rongcal Y, Ye Z, Xian JM (1999) POPGENE version 3.31, a Microsoft Windows based free ware for population genetic analysis. University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
- 10.Botsein D, White RI, Skolnick M, Davis RW (1980) Construction of genetic linkage maps in man using restriction fragment length polymorphism. Am J Hum Genet 32:314–331Google Scholar
- 12.Raymond M, Rousset F (1995) GENEPOP version 1.2: population genetics software for exact tests and eumenicism. J Hered 86:248–249Google Scholar
- 18.FAO (2007) The global plan of action for animal genetic resources and the interlaken declaration. FAO, Rome, Italy. Retrieved July 25, 2011, from ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a1404e/a1404e00.pdf
- 28.Frankel OH, Soule ME (1981) Consmation and evolution. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- 30.Bryant EH, Mccommas SA, Combs LM (1986) The effect of an experimental bottleneck upon quantitative genetic variation in the housefly. Genet 11:1191–1211Google Scholar
- 43.Waldman JR, Bender RE, Wirgin II (1998) Multiple population bottlenecks and DNA diversity in populations of wild striped bass, Morone saxatilis. Fish Bull 96:614–620Google Scholar