Conservation priorities of Indian goat breeds based on genetic and non-genetic parameters
![](/public/icon/gor.png)
![](/public/icon/pdf.png)
Keywords:
Diversity, Extinction probability, Merit, Microsatellite, UtilityAbstract
Indian goats have unique characteristics in terms of production, reproduction, disease resistance and adaptability in different agro-climatic regions of the country. Since, the country has vast goat genetic resources and different climatic regions but limited facilities including fund, there is a need for setting priority for conservation and better utilization. The microsatellite data of 1237 random DNA samples on 25 markers as well as morphological/ demographic information pertaining to 27 goat breeds/populations were used to study the extinction probability and conservation priority based on different approaches. Extinction probability based on census and microsatellite data revealed same order of priority for conservation in >50% cases. Surti, Zalawadi and Gaddi were at higher risk of extinction probability (≥0.63) and more than half of the Indian goat breeds were having <50% extinction probability. The study will help to manage goat genetic resources of the country and to conserve suitable breeds of goat.Downloads
References
Barker J S F. 2001. Conservation and management of genetic diversity: A domestic animal perspective. Canadian Journal for Research 31: 588–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/x00-180
Bennewitz J, Eding H, Ruane J and Simianer H. 2007. Strategies for moving from conservation to utilization, pp 131–46. (Ed.) Oldenbroek K. Utilization and conservation of farm animal genetic resources. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Boettcher P, Tixier-Boichard M, Toro M A, Simianer H, Eding H, Gandini G, Joost S, Garcia D, Colli L, Ajmone-Marsan P
and the GLOBALDIV Consortium. 2010. Objectives, criteria and methods for using molecular genetic data in priority setting for conservation of animal genetic resources. Animal Genetics 41: 64–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2010.02050.x
Caballero A and Toro M A. 2002. Analysis of genetic diversity for the management of conserved subdivided populations. Conservation Genetics 3: 289–99.
DADF. 2014. 19th Livestock Census 2012. All India Report published by Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi.
Gizaw S, Komen H, Windig J J, Hanotte O and Van Arendonk J A M. 2008. Conservation priorities for Ethiopian sheep breeds combining threat status, breed merits and contributions to genetic diversity. Genetic Selection and Evolution 40: 433–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/gse:2008012
Glowatzki-Mullis M, Muntwyler J, Baumle E and Gaillard C. 2008. Genetic diversity measures of Swiss goat breeds as
decision-making support for conservation policy. Small Ruminant Research 74: 202–11.
Gutierrez J P and Goyache F. 2009. MOLKIN Version 3.0: A computer programme for genetic analysis of population using molecular coancestry information (http://www.ucm.es/info/prodanim/JP_Web.).
Hill W G. 1981. Estimation of effective population size from data on linkage disequilibrium. Genetical Research 38: 209–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016672300020553
Petit R, El Mousadik A and Pons O. 1998. Identifying populations for conservation on the basis of genetic markers. Conservation Biology 12: 844–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.96489.x
Pinent T. 2009. ‘Concept for planning conservation schemes for farm animal genetic diversity focused on german chicken breeds’. Doctoral Thesis submitted to the Gottingen centre for biodiversity and ecology, Georg-august University, Gottingen.
Ramadan S, Kayang B B, Eiji, Inoue E, Nirasawa K, Hiroshi Hayakawa H, Ito S and Inoue-Murayama M. 2012. Evaluation of genetic diversity and conservation priorities for Egyptian chickens. Open Journal of Animal Sciences 2: 183–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ojas.2012.23025
Reist-Marti S B, Simianer H, Gibson J, Hanotte O and Rege J. E. O. 2003. Weitzman’s approach and conservation of breed diversity: an application to African Cattle breeds. Conservation Biology 17: 1299–1311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01587.x
Ruane J. 2000. A framework for prioritizing domestic animal breeds for conservation purposes at the national level: A Norwegian case study. Conservation Biology 14: 1385–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99276.x
Simianer H, Marti S B, Gibson J, Hanotte O and Rege J E O. 2003. An approach to the optimal allocation of conservation funds to minimize loss of genetic diversity between livestock breeds. Ecological Economics 45: 377–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00092-2
Tadano R and Kataoka Y. 2014. Genetic diversity in a small chicken population inferred from microsatellite polymorphism. Journal of Poultry Science 51: 242–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2141/jpsa.0130141
Waples R S. 2006. A bias correction for estimates of effective population size based on linkage disequilibrium at unlinked gene loci. Conservation Genetics 7: 167–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-005-9100-y
Waples R S and Do C. 2008. LdNe: A program for estimating effective population size from data on linkage disequilibrium. Molecular Ecology Resources 8: 753–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2007.02061.x
Wright S. 1931. Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics 16: 97–159 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/16.2.97
Downloads
Submitted
Published
Issue
Section
License
The copyright of the articles published in The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences is vested with the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, which reserves the right to enter into any agreement with any organization in India or abroad, for reprography, photocopying, storage and dissemination of information. The Council has no objection to using the material, provided the information is not being utilized for commercial purposes and wherever the information is being used, proper credit is given to ICAR.