Low heterozygosity at microsatellite markers in Iberian red deer with small antlers

Journal of Heredity

Volumn 101, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 553-561

  Pérez González, Javier ^a   Carranza, Juan ^a,b   Torres Porras, Jerónimo ^a,b   Fernández García, José L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXTREMADURA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CÓRDOBA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Cervus elaphus hispanicus, fitness traits; genetic diversity; heterozygosity fitness correlation; inbreeding

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETIC DIFFERENCE; GENETIC VARIABILITY; HETEROZYGOSITY; HORN; INBREEDING; MAJOR HISTOCOMPATIBILITY COMPLEX; MALE; MICROSATELLITE MARKER; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RED DEER; WHITE TAILED DEER;

ANIMALS; ANTLERS; DEER; GENETIC FITNESS; GENETIC VARIATION; HETEROZYGOTE; MALE; MICROSATELLITE REPEATS;

CERVIDAE; CERVUS ELAPHUS; CERVUS ELAPHUS HISPANICUS; ODOCOILEUS VIRGINIANUS;

EID: 77955008984     PISSN: 00221503     EISSN: 14657333     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jhered/esq049     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Allendorf FW, England PR, Luikart G, Ritchie PA, Ryman N. 2008. Genetic effects of harvest on wild animal populations. Trends Ecol Evol. 23:327-337.
2. Allendorf FW, Leary RF. 1986. Heterozygosity and fitness in natural populations of animals. In: Soulé ME, editor. Conservation biology. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates. p. 57-76.
3. Amos W, Worthington Willmer J, Fullard K, Burg TM, Croxall JP, Bloch D, Coulson T. 2001. The influence of parental relatedness on reproductive success. Proc Roy Soc Lond B. 268:2021-2027.
4. Andersson M. 1982. Sexual selection, natural selection and quality advertisement. Biol J Linn Soc. 17:375-393.
5. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
6. Asleson MA, Hellgren EC, Varner LW. 1997. Effects of seasonal protein restriction on antlerogenesis and body-mass in adult, male white-tailed deer. J Wildl Manage. 61:1098-1107.
7. Balloux F, Amos W, Coulson T. 2004. Does heterozygosity estimate inbreeding in real populations? Mol Ecol. 13:3021-3031.
8. Bonnet A, Thevenon S, Maudet F, Maillard JC. 2002. Efficiency of semiautomated fluorescent multiplex PCRs with 11 microsatellite markers for genetic studies of deer populations. Anim Genet. 33:343-350.
9. Carranza J. 2009. Ungulates and their management in Spain. In: Apollonio M, Andersen R, Putman R, editors. Ungulate management in Europe in the XXI Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Carranza J, Alarcos S, Sánchez-Prieto CB, Valencia J, Mateos C. 2004. Disposable-soma senescence mediated by sexual selection in an ungulate. Nature. 432:215-218.
11. Carranza J, Pérez-González J, Mateos C, Fernández-García JL. 2009. Parents' genetic dissimilarity and offspring sex in a polygynous mammal. Mol Ecol. 18:4964-4973.
12. Chapman JR, Nakagawa S, Coltman DW, Slate J, Sheldon BC. 2009. A quantitative review of heterozygosity-fitness correlations in animal populations. Mol Ecol. 18:2746-2765.
13. Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B. 1987. Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Ann. Rev. Ecol. System. 18:237-268.
14. Coltman DW, Festa-Bianchet M, Jorgenson JT, Strobeck C. 2001. Agedependent sexual selection in bighorn rams. Proc Roy Soc Lond B. 269:165-172. (Pubitemid 34107160)
15. Coltman DW, Pilkington JG, Smith JA, Pemberton JM. 1999. Parasitemediated selection against inbred Soay sheep in a free-living, island population. Evolution. 53:1259-1267.
16. Coltman DW, Slate J. 2003. Microsatellite measures of inbreeding: a metaanalysis. Evolution. 57:971-983.
17. Coulson TN, Pemberton JM, Albon SD, Beaumont M, Marshall TC, Slate J, Guinness FE, Clutton-Brock TH. 1998. Microsatellite reveal heterosis in red deer. Proc Roy Soc Lond B. 265:489-495.
18. Da Silva A, Gaillard JM, Yoccoz NG, Hewison AJM, Galan M, Coulson T, Allainé D, Vial L, Delorme D, Van Laere G, et al. 2009. Heterozygosityfitness correlations revealed by neutral and candidate gene markers in roe deer from a long-term study. Evolution. 63:403-417.
19. Darwin D. 1871. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray.
20. DeWoody YD, DeWoody JA. 2005. On the estimation of genome-wide heterozygosity using molecular markers. J Heredity. 96:85-88.
21. Ditchkoff SS, Lochmiller RL, Masters RE, Hoofer SR, Van Den Bussche RA. 2001. Major-histocompatibility-complex-associated variation in secondary sexual traits of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus): evidence for goodgenes advertisement. Evolution. 55:616-625.
22. Falconer DS, Mackay TFC. 1996. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. London, UK: Longman.
23. Fitzsimmons NN, Buskirk SW, Smith MH. 1995. Population history, genetic variability, and horn growth in bighorn sheep. Conserv Biol. 9:314-323.
24. Folstad I, Nilssen AC, Halvorsen O, Andersen J. 1989. Why do male reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) have higher abundances of second and third instar larvae of Hypoderma tarandi than females? Oikos. 55:87-92.
25. Fromhage L, Kokko H, Reid JM. 2009. Evolution of mate choice for genome-wide heterozygosity. Evolution. 63:684-694.
26. Goss RJ. 1983. Deer antlers: regeneration, function, and evolution. New York: Academic Press.
27. Hansson B, Westerberg L. 2002. On the correlation between heterozygosity and fitness in natural populations. Mol Ecol. 11:2467-2474.
28. Harris RB, Wall WA, Allendorf FW. 2002. Genetic consequences of hunting: what do we know and what should we do? Wildl Soc Bull. 30:634-643.
29. Hartl GB, Lang G, Klein F, Willing R. 1991. Relationships between allozymes, heterozygosity and morphological characters in red deer (Cervus elaphus), and the influence of selective hunting on allele frequency distributions. Heredity. 66:343-350.
30. Hedrick PW, Fredrickson R, Ellegren H. 2001. Evaluation of d2, a microsatellite measure of inbreeding and outbreeding, in wolves with a known pedigree. Evolution. 55:1256-1260.
31. Ihara N, Takasuga A, Mizoshita K, Takeda H, Sugimoto M, Mizoguchi Y, Hirano T, Itoh T, Watanabe T, Reed KM, et al. 2004. A comprehensive genetic map of the cattle genome based on 3802 microsatellites. Genome Res. 14:1987-1998.
32. Keller LF, Waller DM. 2002. Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol Evol. 17:230-241.
33. Kempenaers B. 2007. Mate choice and genetic quality: a review of the heterozygosity theory. Adv Stud Behav. 37:189-278.
34. Kruuk LEB, Slate J, Pemberton JM, Brotherstone S, Guinness F, Clutton-Brock T. 2002. Antler size in red deer: heritability and selection but no evolution. Evolution. 56:1683-1695.
35. Kruuk LEB, Slate J, Pemberton JM, Clutton-Brock TH. 2003. Fluctuating asymmetry in a secondary sexual trait: no associations with individual fitness, environmental stress or inbreeding, and no heritability. J Evol Biol. 16:101-113.
36. Kuehn R, Schroeder W, Pirchner F, Rottmann O. 2003. Genetic diversity, gene flow and drift in Bavarian red deer populations (Cervus elaphus). Conserv Genet. 4:157-166.
37. Marshall TC, Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Pemberton JM. 1998. Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol Ecol. 7:639-655.
38. Martínez JG, Carranza J, Fernández-García JL, Sánchez-Prieto CB. 2002. Genetic variation of red deer populations under hunting exploitation in southwest Spain. J Wildl Manage. 66:1273-1282.
39. Martínez M, Rodríguez-Vigal C, Jones OR, Coulson T, San Miguel A. 2005. Different hunting strategies select for different weights in red deer. Biol Lett. 1:353-356.
40. Mateos C, Alarcos S, Carranza J, Sánchez-Prieto CB, Valencia J. 2008. Fluctuating asymmetry of red deer antlers negatively relates to individual condition and proximity to prime age. Anim Behav. 75:1629-1640.
41. Mays LM, Hill GE. 2004. Choosing mates: good genes versus genes that are a good fit. Trends Ecol Evol. 19:554-559.
42. Meister W. 1956. Changes in biological structure of the long bones of white-tailed deer during the growth of antlers. Anat Rec. 124:709-721.
43. Millar SA, Dykes DD, Polesky HF. 1988. A simple salting out procedure for extracting DNA from human nucleated cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 16:1215.
44. Mitchel B. 1967. Growth layers in dental cement for determining the age of red deer (Cervus elephus L.). J Anim Ecol. 36:279-293.
45. Mitton JB, Schuster WSF, Cothran EG, Defries JC. 1993. Correlation between the individual heterozygosity of parents and their offspring. Heredity. 71:59-63.
46. Morris JM, Bubenik GA. 1982. The effects of androgens on the development of antler bone. In: Brown RD, editor. Antler development in Cervidae. Kingsville (TX): Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute. p. 123-141.
47. Neff BD, Pitcher TE. 2008. Mate choice for non-additive genetic benefits: a resolution of the lek paradox. J Theor Biol. 254:147-155.
48. Paterson S, Wilson K, Pemberton JM. 1998. Major histocompatibility complex variation associated with juvenile survival and parasite resistance in a large unmanaged ungulate population (Ovis aries L.). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 95:3714-3719.
49. Pemberton JM. 2008. Wild pedigrees: the way forward. Proc Roy Soc Lond B. 275:613-621.
50. Pemberton JM, Slate J, Bancroft DR, Barrett JA. 1995. Nonamplifying alleles at microsatellite loci: a caution for parentage and population studies. Mol Ecol. 4:249-252.
51. Pérez-González J, Carranza J. 2009. Female-biased dispersal under conditions of low male mating competition in a polygynous mammal. Mol Ecol. 18:4617-4630.
52. Pérez-González J, Mateos C, Carranza J. 2009. Polygyny can increase rather than decrease genetic diversity contributed by males relative to females: evidence from red deer. Mol Ecol. 18:1591-1600.
53. Pomiankowski A, Møller AP. 1995. A resolution of the lek paradox. Proc Roy Soc Lond B. 260:21-29.
54. Preston BT, Stevenson IR, Pemberton JM, Wilson K. 2001. Dominant rams lose out by sperm depletion. Nature. 409:681-682.
55. Qvarnstrom A. 2001. Context-dependent genetic benefits from mate choice. Trends Ecol Evol. 16:5-7.
56. R Development Core Team. 2008. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; [cited 2010 May 3]. Available from: http://www.R-project.org.
57. Raymond M, Rousset F. 1995. Genepop (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J Heredity. 86:248-249.
58. Reid JM. 2007. Secondary sexual ornamentation and non-additive genetic benefits of female mate choice. Proc R Soc Lond B. 274:1395-1402.
59. Reid JM, Arcese P, Cassidy ALEV, Marr AB, Smith JNM, Keller LF. 2005. Hamilton and Zuk meet heterozygosity? Song repertoire size indicates inbreeding and immunity in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Proc R Soc Lond B. 272:481-487.
60. Rowe L, Houle D. 1996. The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc R Soc Lond B. 263:1415-1421.
61. Ruiz-López MJ, Roldán ERS, Espeso G, Gomendio M. 2009. Pedigrees and microsatellite among endangered ungulates: what do they tell us? Mol Ecol. 18:1352-1364.
62. Scribner KT, Pearce J. 2000. Microsatellites: evolutionary and methodological background and empirical applications at individual, population, and phylogenetic levels. In: Baker A, editor. Molecular methods in ecology. London: Blackwell Scientific. p. 235-273.
63. Scribner KT, Smith MH, Johns PE. 1989. Environmental and genetic components of antler growth in white-tailed deer. J Mammal. 70:284-291.
64. Slate J, David P, Dodds KG, Veenvliet BA, Glass BC, Broad TE, McEwan JC. 2004. Understanding the relationship between the inbreeding coefficient and multilocus heterozygosity: theoretical expectations and empirical data. Heredity. 93:255-1254.
65. Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Marshall TC, Pemberton JM, Clutton-Brock TH. 2000. Inbreeding depression influences lifetime breeding success in a wild population of red deer. Proc Roy Soc Lond B. 267:1657-1662.
66. Slate J, Pemberton JM. 2002. Comparing molecular measures for detecting inbreeding depression. J Evol Biol. 15:20-31.
67. Tomkins JL, Radwan J, Kotiaho JS, Tregenza T. 2004. Genic capture and resolving the lek paradox. Trends Ecol Evol. 19:323-328.
68. Väli U, Einarsson A, Waits L, Ellegren H. 2008. To what extent do microsatellite markers reflect genome-wide genetic diversity in natural populations? Mol Ecol. 17:3808-3817.
69. von Hardenberg A, Bassano B, Festa-Bianchet M, Luikart G, Lanfranchi P, Coltman D. 2007. Age-dependent genetic effects on a secondary sexual trait in male Alpine ibex, Capra ibex. Mol Ecol. 16:1969-1980.