4.1 Article

Genetic Structure Analysis of Northeast Asian Sika Deer (Cervus nippon) Populations using Mitochondrial and Microsatellite Markers

出版社

KYUSHU UNIV, FACULTY AGRICULTURAL PUBLICATIONS

关键词

Genetic structure; Mitochondrial DNA cytochrome b; Microsatellite markers; Phylogeny; sika deer (Cervus nippon)

资金

  1. Chungnam National University at Republic of Korea
  2. Environment Protection Division at Inje country office, Inje eup, Inje-gun, Gangwon-do, Republic of Korea [201300213956]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The endemic species of sika deer in South Korean, C. n. hortulorum is classified as an endangered species. South Korea government has been attempted to restore the population of sika deer by importing and breeding. However, there has not been a sufficient study about the native and reintroduced sika deer in South Korea yet. The objective of this study was to investigate the phylogenetic relationship and genetic structure of sika deer in South Korea compared to those in other countries at Northeast Asia. We used 183 samples of sika deer from South Korea, Russia, China and North Korea. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) cytochrome b (cyt b) was used to identify subspecies, and eleven of microsatellite markers were applied for genetic distance and structure analysis. The phylogenetic tree analysis confirmed that the origin of reintroduced subspecies in South Korea is C. n. taiouanus (Taiwanese subspecies) and C. n. yesoensis (Japanese subspecies). Genetic distance analysis using microsatellite markers showed that the South Korean sika deer differed from those in other countries. Sika deer in Russia and North Korea showed similarity. In addition, sika deer in North Korea has been protected and estimated as C. n. hortulorum that would allow to imply the native sika deer species in South Korea which has been extinct. In conclusion, sika deer reintroduced to South Korea would be originated from Japanese and Taiwanese subspecies and C. n. hortulorum would be the indigenous species.

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

4.1
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