Karya koyunlarda mikrosatellit işaretleyicilerle babalık testi

Çalışmada 10 mikrosatellit lokusu (MAF65, OarJMP58, OarFCB193, OarFCB304, OarJMP29, BM8125, OarFCB128, OarCP34, OarVH72, DYMS1) kullanılarak Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Grup Koyun Yetiştirme Programı (ADÜ-GKYP) çekirdek sürüsünde yer alan 16 koç ve bunların 101 yavrusunda babalık testi yapılmıştır. Çalışmada 105 allel gözlemlenmiştir. Lokuslar bazında gözlenen heterozigotluk oranı (Ho) 0.541 ile 0.841 arasında, beklenen heterozigotluk oranı (He) ise 0.699 ile 0.831 arasında olmuştur. Çalışmada, lokusların bireysel olarak dışlama olasılıkları (PE) ve artan lokus kombinasyonları için dışlama olasılıkları (CPE) hesap edilmiştir. PE değeri 0.295 ile 0.514; CPE değeri ise 0.363 ile 0.994 arasında değişmiştir. Karşılama olasılığı (MP) değeri 0.054 ile 0.154, tanımlama gücü (PD) değeri ise 0.85 ile 0.94 arasında değişmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar ülkemizdeki diğer populasyonlar için bir referans teşkil edecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

geviş getiren hayvanlar, koyun ırkları, Bovidae, Ovis, alleller, genler, genetik belirleyiciler, heterozigotluk, mikrosatellitler, babalık

Paternity analysis with microsatellite markers in karya sheep

In the present study, 10 microsatellite loci (MAF65, OarJMP58, OarFCB193, OarFCB304, OarJMP29, BM8125, OarFCB128, OarCP34, OarVH72, DYMS1) were evaluated for their possible use to confirm paternity between 16 rams, their 101 offspring in nucleus flock of Adnan Menderes University Group Sheep Breeding Program (ADU-GKYP). A total of 105 alleles were observed in this study. The estimated observed heterozygosities (Ho) were between 0.541 and 0.841 and expected heterozygosities (He) were between 0.699 and 0.831. Probability of exclusion (PE) for each locus and probability of exclusion for increasing combinations (CPE) of the 10 loci were calculated. PE for each locus were between 0.295 and 0.514, CPE of the 10 loci were between 0.363 and 0.994. Matching probability (MP) (between 0.054 and 0.154) and power of discrimination (PD) (between 0.85 and 0.94) were also calculated. These results can also be used as a reference for the other sheep population in Turkey.

Keywords:

ruminants, sheep breeds, Bovidae, Ovis, alleles, genes, genetic markers, heterozygosity, microsatellites, paternity,

PDF

___

1. Beuzen ND, Stear MJ, Chang KC: Review molecular markers and their use in animal breeding. Vet J, 16, 42-52, 2000.
2. Montaldo HH, Meza-Herrera CA: Use of molecular markers and major genes in the genetic imrovement of livestock. Elect J Biotech, 1, 83-89, 1998.
3. Cunningham EP, Meghen CM: Biological identification systems: genetic markers. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz, 20, 491-499, 2001.
4. Kaul R, Singh A, Vijh RK, Tantia MS, Behl R: Evaluation of the genetic variability of 13 microsatellite markers in native Indian pigs. J Genet, 80, 149-153, 2001.
5. Simm G: Molecular genetic technologies. In, Simm G (Ed): Genetic Improvement of Cattle and Sheep. pp. 372-381, Farming Press United Kingdom, 1998.
6. Bowling AT, Eggleston-Stott ML, Byrns G, Clark RS, Dileanis S, Wictum E: Validation of microsatellite markers for routine horse parentage testing. Anim Genet, 28, 247-252, 1997.
7. Buchanan FC, Littlejohn RP, Galloway SM, Crawford AM: Microsatellites and associated repetitive elements in the sheep genome. Mamm Genome, 4, 258-264, 1993.
8. Kemp SJ, Hishida O, Wambugu J, Rink A, Longeri ML, Ma RZ, Da Y, Lewin HA, Barendse W, Teale AJ: A Panel of Polymorphic bovine, ovine and caprine microsatellite markers. Anim Genet, 26, 299-306, 1995.
9. Marklund S, Ellegren H, Eriksson S, Sandberg K, Andersson L: Parentage yesting and linkage analysis in the horse using a set of highly polymorphic microsatellites. Anim Genet, 25, 19-23, 1994.
10. Arruga MV, Monteagudo LV, Tejedor MT, Barrao R, Ponz R: Analysis of microsatellites and paternity testing in Rasa Aragonesa sheep. Res Vet Sci, 70, 271-273, 2001.
11. Baron EE, Martinez ML, Vernequez RS, Coutinho LL: Parentage testing and effect of misidentification on the estimation of breeding value in Gir cattle. Genet Mol Biol, 25, 389-394, 2002.
12. Geldermann H, Pieper U, Weber WE: Effect of misidentification on the estimation of breeding value and heritability in cattle. J Anim Sci, 63, 1759-1768, 1986.
13. Koşum N: Koyunculukta uygulanan babalık testleri ve önemi. Hayv Üret, 36, 25-32, 1995.
14. Rosa AJM, Schafhouser E, Hassen A, Rouse GH, Wilson DE, Reecy JM: Use of molecular markers to determine parentage in multiple sire Pastures. Beef Res. Rep. Iowa State University USA, 2003.
15. Weller JI, Feldmesser E, Golik M, Tager-Cohen I, Domochovsky R, Alus O, Ezra E, Ron M: Factors affecting incorrect paternity assignment in the Israeli Holstein population. J Dairy Sci, 87, 2627-2640, 2004.
16. Karaca O, Cemal İ, Atay O: Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Grup Koyun Yetiştirme Programı (ADÜ-GKYP). Ege Bölgesi 1. Tarım Kongresi. 7-11 Eylül Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Aydın, 1998.
17. Karaca O, Cemal İ: Koyun genotiplerimizin ıslahı için örnek bir yapılanma: Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Grup Koyun Yetiştirme Programı (ADÜ-GKYP). Hasad Hayv, 21, 30-35, 2005.
18. Karaca O, Cemal İ, Yılmaz O, Yılmaz M: Karya Koyunu. Türkiye Ulusal Koyunculuk Kongresi, 12-13 Şubat 2009, Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir, s. 225-234, 2009.
19. FAO: Food and agriculture organisation of the United Nations secondary guidelines for development of national farm animal genetic resources management plans. Measurement of domestic animal diversity (MoDAD): Recommended microsatellite markers, http://dad.fao.org Accessed: 09.09.2004.
20. Botstein D, White RL, Skolnick M, Davis RW: Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Am J Hum Genet, 32, 314-331, 1980.
21. Nei M: Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small number of individuals. Genetics, 89, 583-590, 1978.
22. Nei M: Molecular evolutionary genetics. In, Nei M (Ed): Molecular evolutionary genetics. Columbia University Press, New York, 1987.
23. Nei M, Kumar S: Molecular evolution and phylogenetics. In, Nei M, Kumar S (Eds): Molecular evolution and phylogenetics. Oxford University Press, London, 2000.
24. Brenner C, Morris J: Paternity index calculations in single locus hypervariable DNA probes: validation and other studies. Proceedings for the first International Symposium on Human Identification. Promega Corporation, Madison, Nov. 1989 pp. 21-53, 1990.
25. Jamieson A, Taylor SS: Comparisons of three probability formulae for parentage exclusion. Anim Genet, 28, 397-400, 1997.
26. Kimberly AH: Statistical Analysis of STR Data. www.promega.com, 2001. Accessed: 23.09.2009.
27. Peakall R, Smouse PE: GenAlEx, Genetic Analysis in Excel, Version 6. School of Botany and Zoology, Australian National University, http://www.anu.edu.au/BoZo/GenAlEx/genalex_download.php, Accessed: 13.10.2006.
28. Marshall TC: Cervus, 3.0, Cervus is a computer program for assignment of parents to their offspring using genetic markers. Cervus, a Windows package for parentage analysis using likelihood approach. CERVUS was written by Tristan Marshall (1998/2006) http://www.fieldgenetics.com, Accessed: 02.07.2008.
29. Kalinowski ST, Taper ML, Marshall TC: Revising how the computer program CERVUS accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment. Mol Ecol, 16, 1099-1106, 2007.
30. Brenner C, Morris CJ: PowerStatsV12.xls Computer Software. Paternity index calculations in single locus hypervariable DNA probes: validation and other studies. http://www.promega.com/geneticidtools/powerstats, Accessed: 05.05.2007.
31. Raymond M, Rousset F: GENEPOP (Version 1.2): Population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J Hered, 86, 248-249, 1995.
32. Yeh FC, Yang RC, Boyle TBJ, Ye ZH, Mao JX: POPGENE the user-friendly shareware for population genetic analysis (1997). University of Alberta, Canada http://www.ualberta.ca/~fyeh/, Accessed: 05.05.2007.
33. Grigaliunaite I, Tapio M, Viinalas H, Grislis Z, Kantanen J, Miceikiene I: Microsatellite variation in the Baltic sheep breeds. Vet Med Zoot, 21, 66-73, 2003.
34. Handley LJL, Byrne K, Santucci F, Townsend S, Taylor M, Bruford MW, Hewitt GM: Genetic structure of European sheep breeds. Heredity, 99, 620- 631, 2007.
35. Pramod S, Kumarasamy P, Chandra ARM, Sridevi P, Rahumathulla PS: Molecular characterization of vembur sheep (Ovis aries) of South India based on microsatellites. Indian J Sci Technol, 2, 55-58, 2009.
36. Soysal Mİ, Koban E, Özkan E, Altunok V, Bulut Z, Nizamlıoglu M, Togan I: Evolutionary relationship among three native and two crossbreed sheep breeds of Turkey: Preliminary results. Revue Med Vet, 156 (5): 289-293, 2005.
37. Tapio I, Tapio M, Grislis Z, Holm LE, Jeppsson S, Kantanen J, Miceikiene I, Olsaker I, Viinalass H, Eythorsdottir E: Unfolding of population structure in Baltic sheep breeds using microsatellite analysis. Heredity, 94, 448-456, 2005.
38. Tascon DC, LittleJohn RP, Almeida PAR, Crawford AM: Genetic variation within Merino Sheep breed: Analysis of closely related populations using microsatellites. Anim Genet, 31, 243-251, 2000.
39. Yıldıran FAB, Çakır Ş: Analysis of genetic polymorphism with microsatellite method in Turkey local sheep breeds. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg, 18 (1): 75-79, 2012.
40. Cerit H, Altınel A, Avanus K, Elmaz O, Karayel E, Temelli R, Kirişçi E: Polymorphism evaluation of various genomic loci in Kıvırcık Sheep breed of Turkey. The 11th International Symposium of the World Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians and OIE Seminar on Biotechnology, 9-13 Kasım Bangkok, Thailand, pp. 151-152, 2003.
41. Quanbari S, Eskandari Nasab MP, Osfoori R, Hagh Nazari A: Power of microsatellite markers for analysis of genetic variation and parentage vertification in sheep. Pak J Biol Sci, 10, 1632-1638, 2007.
42. Roberts CS, Thomas G: Use of microsatellite markers to include or exclude individuals as Barbados Blackbelly sheep, http://advertpush.com/ agri/images/stories/information, Accessed: 18.08.2009.
43. Ivankovic A, Dovc P, Kavar T, Caput P, Mioc B, Pavic V, Stuhec V, Leto J: Genetic characterisation of the Pag island sheep breed based on microsatellite and mtDNA data. Small Ruminant Res,57, 167-174, 2005.
44. Marshall TC, Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Pemberton JM: Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol Ecol, 7, 639-655, 1998.
45. Araujo AMD, Guimaraes SEF, Pereira CS, Lopes PS, Rodrigues MT, Machado TMM: Paternity in Brazilian goats through the use of DNA microsatellites. R Bras Zootec, 39, 1011-1014, 2010.
46. Bolormaa S, Ruvinsky A, Walkden-Brown S, Van der Werf J: DNA- based parentage verification in two Australian goat herds. Small Ruminant Res, 80, 95-100, 2008.
47. Ganai NA, Yadav BR: Parentage determination in three breeds of Indian goat using heterologous microsatellite markers. In, Makkar HPS and Viljoen GJ (Eds): Applications of gene-based technologies for ımproving animal production and health in developing countries. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 613-620, 2005.
48. Jimenez-Gamero I, Dorado G, Munoz-Serrano A, Analla M, Alonso- Moraga A: DNA microsatellites to ascertain pedigree-recorded information in a selecting nucleus of Murciano-Granadina dairy goats. Small Ruminant Res, 65, 266-273, 2006.
49. Luikart G, Biju-Duval MP, Ertuğrul O, Zagdsuren Y, Maudet C, Taberlet P: Power of 22 microsatellite markers in fluorescent multiplexes for parentage testing in goats (Capra hircus). Anim Genet, 30, 431-438, 1999.
50. Zhao ZS, Wang GL, Guo JG, Li DQ: Polymorphism distributions of 9 microsatellite loci in Chinese Merino sheep. Yi Chuan, 28, 939-944, 2006.