The American Kennel Club and the Fédération Cynologique Internationale recognize
two phenotypic variants of Great Dane breed denominated American and European
varieties. Historically, these varieties have been segregated according to morphological
characteristics. In an attempt to obtain a better characterization, breeders have
been interested in the genetic parameters that could evaluate the within-breed diversity.
In this document, we studied the genetic structure of Great Dane breed with 10
STR markers in 88 dogs using capillary electrophoresis. Cluster analysis,
population differentiation and phylogenetic analyses revealed that American and
European varieties are genetically independent. Nevertheless, within the
American variety a genetic stratification was found. Additionally, a high misclassification
(28%) was detected, which could be due to wrong registration or false
paternity. Our results support the importance to deem genetic markers as useful
tools in breeding control. Similarly, these studies serve as an accurate reference
to establish standards by dog breeding associations and for choosing among dogs
for inter-breeding. Nevertheless, genetic tools are only a complement of
morphological methods, since both are reshuffling the control over the breeding
line. Notwithstanding, this database provides an overall and scape concerning the
impact of genetic diversity within-breed. Unmistakably, more databases are
needed to increase the quality of the breeding line as well as the number of
STR in order to study, with more detail, the genetic structure in the Great
Dane race.
References
[1]
Crowley, J. and Adelman, B. (1998) The Complete Dog Book; Official Publication of the American Kennel Club. Howell Book House, New York.
[2]
Parker, H.G. (2012) Genomic Analyses of Modern Dog Breeds. Mammalian Genome, 23, 19-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00335-011-9387-6
[3]
Huson, H.J., Parker, H.G., Runstadler, J. and Ostrander, E.A. (2010) A Genetic Dissection of Breed Composition and Performance Enhancement in the Alaskan sled Dog. BMC Genetics, 11, 71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2156-11-71
[4]
Boyko, A.R., Quignon, P., Li, L., Schoenebeck J.J., Degenhardt, J.D., et al. (2010) A Simple Genetic Architecture Underlies Morphological Variation in Dogs. PLoS Biology, 8, e1000451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000451
[5]
Lindblad-Toh, K., Wade, C.M., Mikkelsen, T.S., Karlsson, EK., Jaffe, D.B., et al. (2005) Genome Sequence, Comparative Analysis and Haplotype Structure of the Domestic Dog. Nature, 438, 803-819. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature04338
[6]
Ostrander, E.A. and Wayne, R.K. (2005) The Canine Genome. Genome Research, 15, 1706-1716. http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gr.3736605
[7]
Mellersh, C. (2011) DNA Testing and Domestic Dogs. Mammalian Genome, 23, 109-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00335-011-9365-z
[8]
Wade, C.M. (2011) Inbreeding and Genetic Diversity in Dogs: Results from DNA Analysis. The Veterinary Journal, 189, 183-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2011.06.017
[9]
Goudet, J. (2002) FSTAT Software. Institute of Ecology BB, UNIL, CH-1015 (2002) Editor. 2.9.3.2 ed., Laussane.
[10]
Belkhir, L.C., Raufaste, N. and Bonhomme, F. (1996-2004) GENETIX 4.05 Logiciel Sous Windows TM Pour la Génétique des Populations. In: Laboratoire Génome P, Interactions, CNRS UMR 5171, editor, Université de Montpellier II, Montpellier.
[11]
Excoffier, L, Laval, G and Schneider, S. (2005) Arlequin (Version 3.0): An Integrated Software Package for Population Genetics Data Analysis. Evol Bioinform Online, 1, 47-50.
[12]
Peakall, R. and Smouse, P.E. (2006) GENALEX 6: Genetic Analysis in Excel. Population Genetic Software for Teaching and Research. Molecular Ecology Notes, 6, 288-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2005.01155.x
[13]
Pritchard, J.K., Stephens, M. and Donnelly, P. (2000) Inference of Population Structure Using Multilocus Genotype Data. Genetics, 155, 945-959.
[14]
Felsenstein, F. (2005) PHYLIP (Plylogeny Inference Package) Version 3.2. Cladistics, 5, 164-166.
[15]
Page, R.D. (1996) TreeView: An Application to Display Phylogenetic Trees on Personal Computers. Computer Applications in the Biosciences, 12, 357-358.
[16]
Efron, B., Halloran, E. and Holmes, S. (1996) Bootstrap Confidence Levels for Phylogenetic Trees. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 93, 13429-13434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.23.13429
[17]
Saitou, N. and Nei, M. (1987) The Neighbor-Joining Method: A New Method for Reconstructing Phylogenetic Trees. Mol Biol Evol, 4, 406-425.
[18]
Nei, M., Tajima, F. and Tateno, Y. (1983) Accuracy of Estimated Phylogenetic Trees from Molecular Data. II. Gene Frequency Data. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 19, 153-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02300753
[19]
Oliehoek, P.A. and Bijma, P. (2009) Effects of Pedigree Errors on the Efficiency of Conservation Decisions. Genetics Selection Evolution, 41, 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-41-9
[20]
Leroy, G., Verrier, E., Meriaux, J.C. and Rognon, X. (2009) Genetic Diversity of Dog Breeds: Between-Breed Diversity, Breed Assignation and Conservation Approaches. Animal Genetics, 40, 333-343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2008.01843.x
[21]
Leroy, G., Verrier, E., Meriaux, J.C. and Rognon, X. (2009) Genetic Diversity of Dog Breeds: Within-Breed Diversity Comparing Genealogical and Molecular Data. Animal Genetics, 40, 323-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2008.01842.x
[22]
Pires, A.E., Amorim, I.R., Ginja, C., Gomes, M., Godinho, I., et al. (2009) Molecular Structure in Peripheral Dog Breeds: Portuguese Native Breeds as a Case Study. Animal Genetics, 40, 383-392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2009.01849.x
[23]
Quignon, P., Herbin, L., Cadieu, E., Kirkness, E.F., Hedan, B., et al. (2007) Canine Population Structure: Assessment and Impact of Intra-Breed Stratification on SNP-Based Association Studies. PLoS One, 2, e1324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001324
[24]
Kanthaswamy, S., Tom, B.K., Mattila, A.M., Johnston, E., Dayton, M., et al. (2009) Canine Population Data Generated from a Multiplex STR Kit for Use in Forensic Casework. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 54, 829-840. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01080.x
[25]
DeNise, S., Johnston, E., Halverson, J., Marshall, K., Rosenfeld, D., et al. (2004) Power of Exclusion for Parentage Verification and Probability of Match for Identity in American Kennel Club Breeds Using 17 Canine Microsatellite Markers. Animal Genetics, 35, 14-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2052.2003.01074.x
[26]
Van Asch, B., Pinheiro, R., Pereira, R., Alves, C., Pereira, V., et al. (2009) A Framework for the Development of STR Genotyping in Domestic Animal Species: Characterization and Population Study of 12 Canine X-Chromosome Loci. Electrophoresis, 31, 303-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/elps.200900389
[27]
Wellmann, R. and Bennewitz, J. (2011) Identification and Characterization of Hierarchical Structures in Dog Breeding Schemes, a Novel Method Applied to the Norfolk Terrier. Journal of Animal Science, 89, 3846-3858. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3709
[28]
Zenke, P., Egyed, B., Zoldag, L. and Padar, Z. (2011) Population Genetic Study in Hungarian Canine Populations Using Forensically Informative STR Loci. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 5, e31-e36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2010.03.013
[29]
Chen, W.K., Swartz, J.D., Rush, L.J. and Alvarez, C.E. (2009) Mapping DNA Structural Variation in Dogs. Genome Research, 19, 500-509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gr.083741.108
