Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-12T02:32:27.933Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic variability of populations and similarity of subpopulations in Austrian cattle breeds determined by analysis of pedigrees

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. Sölkner ,
L. Filipcic  and
N. Hampshire
J. Sölkner
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Science, University of Agricultural Sciences Vienna, Gregor-Mendel-Strasse 33, A-1180 Vienna, Austria
L. Filipcic
Affiliation:
University Computing Centre, J. Marohnica bb, HR-10000 Zagreb, Croatia
N. Hampshire
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Loughborough LE12 5RD
Get access

Abstract

Parameters based on probabilities of gene origin were used to evaluate the genetic variability of four Austrian cattle breeds. Effective numbers of founders, ancestors and remaining founder genomes showed that all four populations investigated are rather small genetically. Effective numbers of remaining founder genomes were 94 for Simmental, 41 for Braunvieh (Brown Swiss), 32 for Pinzgauer and 21 for Grauvieh (Grey cattle, a small mountain breed). As the value of 94 for Simmental was rather large in comparison with estimates from other populations in previous studies, the effect of population structure was investigated. A cosine measure of similarity based on differences in individual founder contributions to different subpopulations was defined and used for analysis. Subpopulations defined by regions were clearly more distinct for Simmental than for Braunvieh. The size of the cosine values depended on the method of calculating founder contributions and was overestimated when choosing the method not accounting for drift and bottlenecks (effective number of founders).

Keywords

cattlefounder effectgenetic variationpedigree
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 67 , Issue 2 , October 1998 , pp. 249 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bhattacharyya, A. 1946. On a measure of divergence between two multinomial populations. Sankhya 7: 401–407.Google Scholar
Boichard, D., Maignel, L. and Vender, É. 1997. The value of using probabilities of gene origin to measure genetic variability in a population. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 29: 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Central Association of Austrian Cattle Breeders. 1996. Cattle breeding in Austria, 1995. Brochure of the Central Association of Austrian Cattle Breeders, Vienna.Google Scholar
Crow, J. F. and Kimura, M. 1970. An introduction to population genetics theory. Harper and Row, New York, USA.Google Scholar
Hartl, D. L. and Clark, A. G. 1989. Principles of population genetics, second edition. Sinauer, Sunderland, USA.Google Scholar
Jacquard, A. 1974. The genetic structure of populations. Springer, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacy, R. C. 1989. Analysis of founder representation in pedigrees: founder equivalents and founder genome equivalents. Zoo Biology 8: 111–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacCluer, J. W., Van de Berg, J. L., Read, B. and Ryder, O. A. 1986. Pedigree analysis by computer simulation. Zoo Biology 5: 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maignel, L., Boichard, D. and Verrier, E. 1996. Genetic variability of French dairy breeds estimated from pedigree information. Interbull Bulletin 14: 49–54.Google Scholar
Nei, M. 1987. Molecular evolutionary genetics. Columbia University Press, New York, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nei, M., Tajima, F. and Tateno, Y. 1983. Accuracy of estimated phylogenetic trees from molecular data. Journal of Molecular Evolution 19: 153–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Takezaki, N. and Nei, M. 1996. Genetic distances and reconstruction of phylogenetic trees from microsatellite DNA. Genetics 144: 389–399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed