Using genome-wide information to minimize the loss of diversity in conservation programmes

Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics

Volumn 128, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 456-464

  de Cara, M A R ^a   Fernandez J ^a   Toro, M A ^b   Villanueva, B ^a  

^a INIA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Coancestry; Genealogy; Molecular markers; Optimal contributions

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BREEDING; CHROMOSOME; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FEMALE; GENETIC MARKER; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENETICS; GENOMICS; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; STATISTICS;

ANIMALS; BREEDING; CHROMOSOMES; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; FEMALE; GENETIC MARKERS; GENETIC VARIATION; GENOMICS; MALE; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES;

EID: 80755169307     PISSN: 09312668     EISSN: 14390388     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0388.2011.00971.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Beaty T.H., Fallin M.D., Hetmanski J.B., McIntosh I., Chong S.S., Ingersoll R., Sheng X., Chakraborty R., Scott A.F. (2005) Haplotype diversity in 11 candidate genes across four populations. Genetics, 171, 259-267.
2. Caballero A., Rodríguez-Ramilo S. (2010) A new method for the partition of allelic diversity within and between subpopulations. Conserv. Genet., 11, 2219-2229.
3. Cardon L.R., Abecasis G.R. (2003) Using haplotype blocks to map human complex trait loci. Trends Genet., 13, 135-140.
4. Csillery K., Johnson T., Beraldi D., Clutton-Brock T., Coltman D., Hangsson B., Spong G., Pemberton J.M. (2006) Performance of marker-based relatedness estimators in natural populations of outbred vertebrates. Genetics, 173, 2091-2101.
5. Daetwyler H.D., Pong-Wong R., Villanueva B., Woolliams J.A. (2010) The impact of genetic architecture on genome-wide evaluation methods. Genetics, 185, 1021-1031.
6. Eding H., Meuwissen T.H.E. (2001) Marker-based estimates of between and within population kinships for the conservation of genetic diversity. J. Anim. Breed. Genet., 118, 141-159.
7. Fernández J., Toro M.A. (1999) The use of mathematical programming to control inbreeding in selection schemes. J. Anim. Breed. Genet., 116, 447-466.
8. Fernández J., Toro M.A., Caballero A. (2003) Fixed contributions designs vs. minimization of global coancestry to control inbreeding in small populations. Genetics, 165, 885-894.
9. Fernández J., Toro M.A., Caballero A. (2004) Managing individual's contributions to maximize the allelic diversity maintained in small, conserved populations. Conserv. Biol., 18, 1358-1367.
10. Fernández J., Villanueva B., Pong-Wong R., Toro M.A. (2005) Efficiency of the use of pedigree and molecular marker information in conservation programs. Genetics, 170, 1313-1321.
11. Frankham R., Ballou J.D., Briscoe D.A. (2002) Introduction to Conservation Genetics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
12. Grundy B., Villanueva B., Woolliams J.A. (1998) Dynamic selection procedures for constrained inbreeding and their consequences for pedigree development. Genet. Res., 72, 159-168.
13. Hayes B.J., Visscher P.M., Goddard M.E. (2009) Increased accuracy of artificial selection by using the realized relationship matrix. Genet. Res., 91, 47-60.
14. Lynch M., Ritland K. (1999) Estimation of pairwise relatedness with molecular markers. Genetics, 152, 1753-1766.
15. Meuwissen T.H.E. (1997) Maximizing the response of selection with a predefined rate of inbreeding. J. Anim. Sci., 75, 934-940.
16. Oliehoek P.A., Windig J.J., van Arendonk J.A.M., Bijma P. (2006) Estimating relatedness between individuals in general populations with a focus on their use in conservation programs. Genetics, 173, 483-496.
17. Pemberton J.M. (2004) Measuring inbreeding depression in the wild: the old ways are the best. Trends Ecol. Evol., 19, 613-615.
18. Santure A.W., Stapley J., Ball A.D., Birkhead T.R., Burke T., Slate J. (2010) On the use of large marker panels to estimate inbreeding and relatedness: empirical and simulation studies of a pedigreed zebra finch population typed at 771 SNPs. Mol. Ecol., 19, 1439-1451.
19. Silió L., Fernández A., Mercade A., Martin-Palomino P., Lopez M.A., Rodrigañez J. (2010) Measuring inbreeding in a closed pig strain from high-density SNPs genotypes. In: Proceedings of the 9th World Conference of Genetics Applied to Livestock Production.
20. Solberg T.R., Sonesson A.K., Woolliams J.A., Meuwissen T.H.E. (2008) Genomic selection using different types and densities. J. Anim. Sci., 86, 2447-2454.
21. Sonesson A.K., Meuwissen T.H.E. (2009) Testing strategies for genomic selection in aquaculture breeding programs. Genet. Sel. Evol., 41, 37.
22. Toro M., Silió L., Rodrigañez J., Rodriguez C., Fernández J. (1999) Optimal use of genetic markers in conservation programmes. Genet. Sel. Evol., 31, 255-261.
23. Toro M., Barragán C., Óvilo C., Rodrigañez J., Rodriguez C., Silió L. (2002) Estimation of coancestry in Iberian pigs using molecular markers. Conserv. Genet., 3, 309-320.
24. Toro M.A., Fernández J., Caballero A. (2009) Molecular characterization of breeds and its use in conservation. Livest. Sci., 120, 174-195.
25. VanRaden P.M. (2008) Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. J. Dairy Sci., 91, 4414-4423.
26. Villanueva B., Pong-Wong R., Fernández J., Toro M.A. (2005) Benefits from marker-assisted selection under an additive polygenic genetic model. J. Anim. Sci., 83, 1747-1752.
27. Wang J. (2001) Optimal marker-assisted selection to increase the effective size of small populations. Genetics, 157, 867-874.
28. Weir B.S., Anderson A.D., Hepler A.B. (2006) Genetic relatedness analysis: modern data and new challenges. Nat. Rev. Genet., 7, 771-780.