JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Genetic Variation and Relationships of Korean Native Chickens and Foreign Breeds Using 15 Microsatellite Markers
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Genetic Variation and Relationships of Korean Native Chickens and Foreign Breeds Using 15 Microsatellite Markers
Kong, H.S.; Oh, J.D.; Lee, J.H.; Jo, K.J.; Sang, B.D.; Choi, C.H.; Kim, S.D.; Lee, S.J.; Yeon, S.H.; Jeon, G.J.; Lee, H.K.;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess the genetic variation and establish the relationship amongst breeds and strains using 15 chicken specific microsatellite markers. A total of 285 unrelated DNA samples from four Korean native chicken strains (Black strain of Korean native chicken; KL, Red Brown strain of Korean native chicken; KR, Ogol strain of Korean native chicken; KS and Yellow Brown strain of Korean native chicken; KY) and three introduced chicken breeds (F strain of White Leghorn; LF, K strain of White Leghorn; LK, Rhode Island Red; RC and Cornish; CN) were genotyped to estimate within and between breed genetic diversity indices. All the loci analyzed in 15 microsatellite markers showed a polymorphic pattern and the number of alleles ranged from 5 to 14. The polymorphism information content (PIC) of UMA1019 was the highest (0.872) and that of ADL0234 was the lowest (0.562). The expected total heterozygosity (He) within breed and mean number of observed alleles ranged from 0.540 (LF) to 0.689 (KY), and from 3.47 (LK) to 6.07 (KR), respectively. The genetic variation of KR and KY were the highest and the lowest within Korean native strains, respectively. The genetic distance results showed that Korean native chicken strains were separated with the three introduced chicken breeds clustered into another group. The lowest distance (0.149) was observed between the KR and KL breeds and the highest distance (0.855) between the KR and LK breeds. The microsatellite polymorphism data were shown to be useful for assessing the genetic relationship between Korean native strains and other foreign breeds.
 Keywords
Korean Native Chicken (KNC);Microsatellite Loci;Genetic Relationship;Heterozygosity;
 Language
English
 Cited by
 References
1.
Buchanan, F. C., L. J. Adams, R. P. Littlejohn, J. F. Maddox and A. M. Crawford. 1994. Determination of evolutionary relationships among sheep breeds using microsatellites. Genom. 22:397-403 crossref(new window)

2.
Bowling, A. T. 1996. Nine equine dinucleotide repeats at micresatellite loci UCDEQ136, UCDEQ405, UCDEQ412, UCDEQ425, UCEDQ437, UCDEQ467, UCDEQ487, UCDEQ502 and UCDEQ 505. Anim. Genet. 28:370-371

3.
Dewoody, J. A. and J. C. Avise. 2000. Microsatellite variation in marine, freshwater and anadromous fishes compared with other animals. J. Fish Biol. 56:461-473 crossref(new window)

4.
Fan, B., Y. Z. Chen, C. Moran, S. H. Zhao, B. Liu, M. J. Zhu, T. A. Xiong and K. Li. 2005. Individual-breed Assignment Analysis in Swine Populations by Using Microsatellite Markers. Asian- Aust. J. Anim Sci. 18(11):1529-1534

5.
Groenen, M. A., H. H. Cheng, N. Bumstead, B. F. Benkel, W. E. Briles, T. Burke, D. W. Burt, L. B. Crittenden, J. Dodgson, J. Hillel, S. Lamont, A. P. de Leon, M. Soller, H. Takahashi and A. Vignal. 2000. A consensus linkage map of the chicken genome. Genome Res. 10(1):137-147

6.
MacHugh, D. E., R. T. Loftus, D. G. Barley, P. M. Sharp and P. Cunningham. 1994. Microsatellite DNA variation within and among European cattle breeds. Proc. Royal Soc. Lond. Series B. 256:25-31

7.
Martinez, A. M., J. V. Delgado, A. Rodero and J. L. Vega-pla. 2000. Genetic structure of the Iberian pig breed using microsatellite. Anim. Genet. 31:295-301 crossref(new window)

8.
Miller, S. A., D. D. Dykes and H. F. Polesky. 1988. A simple salting out procedure for extracting DNA from human nucleated cells. Nucleic. Nucleic Acids Res. 16:1215

9.
Nei, M. 1972. Genetic distance between populations. Anim. Nat. 106:283-297 crossref(new window)

10.
Nei, M. 1978. Estimation of average heterozygosity and gentic distance from a small number of individuals. Genet. 89:583-590

11.
Osman, S. A. M., M. Sekino, M. Nishibori, Y. Yamamoto and M. Tsudzuki. 2005. Genetic Variability and Relations of Native Japanese Chickens Assessed by Microsatellite DNA Profiling. -Focusing on the Breeds Established in Kochi Prefecture, Japan. Asian-Aust. J. Anim Sci. 18(6):755-761

12.
Ota, T. 1993. DISPAN. Pennsylvania Utate University, PA. USA

13.
Pandey, A. K., M. S. Tanita, D. Kumar, B. Misra, P. Choudhary and R. K. Vijh. 2002. Microsatellite analysis of three poultry breeds of India. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 15:1536-1542

14.
Park, S. 2000. Microsatellite Toolkit For MS Excel 97 or 2000 (personnel communication)

15.
Sirchia, S. M., I. Garagiola, C. De-Andreis, I. Gazzoli, M. Gramegna and G. Colucci. 1996. Characterization of four microsatellites in an Italian population and their application to paternity testing. Mol. Cell Probes. 10(2):155-158 crossref(new window)

16.
Sneath, P. H. A. and R. R. Sokal. 1973. Numerical Taxonomy, Freeman, San Francisco, USA

17.
Tautz, D. 1989. Hypervariability of simple sequence as a general source gor for polymorphic DNA marker. Nuleic Acids Res. 17(16):6463-6447 crossref(new window)

18.
Yoon, D. H., J. D. Oh, J. H. Lee, H. S. Kong, B. W. Cho, J. D. Kim, K. J. Jeon, C. Y. Jo, G. J. Jeon and H. K. Lee. 2005. Establishment of individual identification system based on the microsatellite polymorphism in Hanwoo. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 18(6):762-766