4.7 Article

Deeper insight into maternal genetic assessments and demographic history for Egyptian indigenous chicken populations using mtDNA analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH
卷 7, 期 5, 页码 615-623

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jare.2016.06.005

关键词

Mitochondrial DNA; Phylogeography; Maternal lineages; Egyptian indigenous chicken populations; Demographic history

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study principally sought to reveal the demographic expansion of Egyptian indigenous chickens (EIC) using representative breeds: Sinai (North), Fayoumi (Middle) and Dandarawi (South) of Egypt as well as to deeply clarify their genetic diversity, possible matrilineal origin and dispersal routes. A total of 33 partial mitochondrial DNA sequences were generated from EIC and compared with a worldwide reference dataset of 1290 wild and domestic chicken sequences. Study populations had 12 polymorphic variable sites and 7 haplotypes. A lack of maternal substructure between EIC was detected (F-ST= 0.003). The unimodal mismatch distribution and negative values of Tajima's D (-0.659) and Fu's Fs (-0.157) indicated demographic expansion among EIC and pointed to Fayoumi as the oldest EIC population. Egyptian haplotypes were clustered phylogenetically into two divergent clades. Their phylogeography revealed an ancient single maternal lineage of Egyptian chickens likely derived from Indian-Subcontinent. Moreover, a recent maternal commercial heritage possibly originated in Yunnan-Province and/or surrounding areas was admixed restrictedly into Sinai. It is implied that Egypt was an entry point for Indian chicken into Africa and its further dispersal route to Europe. This study provides a clue supporting the previous assumption that urged utilizing consistent founder populations having closely related progenitors for synthetizing a stabilized homogenous crossbreed as a sustainable discipline in breeding program. (C) 2016 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Cairo University.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据