[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.9
2.7
Journals
Animals
Special Issues
Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer
share announcement

Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Animal Genetics and Genomics".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 June 2021) | Viewed by 24245

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Javier Pérez-González

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Biology and Ethology Unit, Department of Anatomy, Cellular Biology and Zoology, University de Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain
Interests: population genetics; behavioral ecology; game management; red deer; wild boar
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Dr. Juan Carranza

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Wildlife Research Unit (UIRCP), University of Córdoba, 14071 Córdoba, Spain
Interests: behavioural ecology; genetic conservation; red deer; wild boar

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Life is sustained by genetic diversity. Genetic diversity is necessary for the functioning of selection, for population conservation to environmental changes and pathogens or, at individual level, for survival. Genetic diversity is a key variable for the maintenance of individuals, populations, communities and human activities associated with animals.     

Wild boar and deer have crucial roles in communities in which they appear. Their presence strongly affects the dynamics of organisms they consume, the predators they support or the pathogens they are infected with. Moreover, these species are normally in close contact with human activities, being cause of important benefits and potential dangers.

The ecological importance and the relationship with human activities, make the genetic diversity of wild boar and deer to be a topic that must be studied in depth. This topic might be approached with three questions:

  • Which is the pattern of genetic diversity in wild boar and deer around the world? This question might be answer by phylogeographic analyses or studies describing the distribution of genetic diversity along large geographical areas.
  • Which are the factors affecting genetic diversity of wild boar and deer species? Processes related to animal behaviour, ecological features or demography might influence the level of genetic diversity of populations. Moreover, human activities such as game management, animal translocations or artificial selection might affect genetic diversity at diverse scales.
  • Which are the consequences of genetic diversity of wild boar and deer species? Different levels of genetic diversity might have consequences in the interaction with other organisms in their communities such as pathogens. These interactions might have important implications in wildlife and human societies.

This special issue welcomes contributions on the topic and questions posed above.

Dr. Javier Pérez-González
Dr. Juan Carranza
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • genetic diversity
  • wild boar
  • deer
  • population genetics
  • phylogeography
  • host immune system
  • artificial selection

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (6 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Editorial

Jump to: Research, Review, Other

5 pages, 226 KiB  
Editorial
Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer
by Javier Pérez-González and Juan Carranza
Animals 2023, 13(1), 11; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13010011 - 20 Dec 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1573
Abstract
Genetic diversity provides the long-term capacity of species, communities, and the biosphere to persist under change [...] Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer)

Research

Jump to: Editorial, Review, Other

13 pages, 3519 KiB  
Article
Spatial Genetic Structure and Demographic History of the Wild Boar in the Qinling Mountains, China
by Chaochao Hu, Sijia Yuan, Wan Sun, Wan Chen, Wei Liu, Peng Li and Qing Chang
Animals 2021, 11(2), 346; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020346 - 29 Jan 2021
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2750
Abstract
Species dispersal patterns and population genetic structure can be influenced by geographical features. Qinling Mountains (QM) provide an excellent area for phylogeographic study. The phylogeography of Asian-wide wild boars revealed the colonization route. However, the impact of the QM on genetic diversity, genetic [...] Read more.
Species dispersal patterns and population genetic structure can be influenced by geographical features. Qinling Mountains (QM) provide an excellent area for phylogeographic study. The phylogeography of Asian-wide wild boars revealed the colonization route. However, the impact of the QM on genetic diversity, genetic structure and population origin is still poorly understood. In this study, genetic analysis of wild boar in the QM was conducted based on the mitochondrial control region (943 bp) and twelve microsatellite loci of 82 individuals in 16 sampling locations. Overall genetic haplotype diversity was 0.86, and the nucleotide diversity was 0.0079. A total of 17 new haplotypes were detected. The level of genetic diversity of wild boars in QM was lower than in East Asia, but higher than in Europe. Phylogenetic analysis showed the weak genetic divergence in QM. Mismatch analysis, neutrality tests, and Bayesian Skyline Plot (BSP) results revealed that the estimates of effective population size were under demographic equilibrium in the past. Spatial analysis of molecular variance indicated no obvious phylogeographic structure. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Sampling sites distribution of <span class="html-italic">Sus scrofa</span> population in this study. The numbers indicate local populations (see <a href="#animals-11-00346-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a> for details).</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Phylogenetic tree and the median-joining network based on D-loop sequences of wild boar in QM. (<b>a</b>) A Bayesian 50% consensus phylogenetic tree for the 17 sampled haplotypes of <span class="html-italic">Sus scrofa</span> based on D-loop sequences. Numbers above the tree branches are the posterior probabilities. Numbers indicate haplotype codes (abbreviated to save space: e.g., H1 denotes haplotype 1). (<b>b</b>) The median-joining network. Dashes in network represent the corresponding mutation steps. The size of circles denotes the haplotype frequency. Small black circles indicated missing haplotypes that were not observed. The five populations are indicated by different colors. See <a href="#animals-11-00346-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a> for definitions for EQL, MQL, WQL, Micang and Bashan.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) Bayesian inferenced tree of East Asian wild boar based on 511 bp mtDNA control region sequences. Numbers above the tree branches are posterior probabilities, and letters under the tree branches represent the name of each clade. The black dots represent the haplotype found in QM area. The color of branches represented samples’ geographical regions corresponding to (<b>c</b>). (<b>b</b>) The detailed structure of the Clade B. (<b>c</b>) Map showing the distribution and sampling localities used in this study. NEA, Northeast Asia; CC, Central China; ECAC, the eastern coastal areas of China; YKP, Yunnan–Kweichow Plateau; Japan, Japan Island; Mekong. The black circles represent samples used in this study; the red circles represent samples downloaded from GenBank.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Results of Bayesian model-based clustering in STRUCTURE based on 12 loci. (<b>a</b>) The plot of the mean posterior probability LnP(<span class="html-italic">D</span>); (<b>b</b>) The plot of the values of Δ<span class="html-italic">K</span> against <span class="html-italic">K</span> values (number of clusters) resulting from 10 runs; (<b>c</b>) Bar plots showing Bayesian assignment probabilities for <a href="#animals-11-00346-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a> for definitions of EQL, MQL, WQL, Micang and Bashan.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Bayesian skyline plot showing the historical demographic trend of <span class="html-italic">Sus crofa</span> in QM for the total samples. Time (<span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis) represent in million years and population size (<span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis) is measured as the product of effective population size per generation length. Dark lines represent median value inferred NE, blue lines mark the 95% highest probability density (HPD) intervals in all panels.</p> Full article ">
12 pages, 2706 KiB  
Article
Genetic Population Structure of Wild Pigs in Southern Texas
by Johanna Delgado-Acevedo, Angeline Zamorano, Randy W. DeYoung and Tyler A. Campbell
Animals 2021, 11(1), 168; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11010168 - 12 Jan 2021
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 3466
Abstract
Wild pigs (Sus scrofa) alter ecosystems, affect the economy, and carry diseases that can be transmitted to livestock, humans, and wildlife. Understanding wild pig movements and population structure data, including natural population boundaries and dispersal, may potentially increase the efficiency and [...] Read more.
Wild pigs (Sus scrofa) alter ecosystems, affect the economy, and carry diseases that can be transmitted to livestock, humans, and wildlife. Understanding wild pig movements and population structure data, including natural population boundaries and dispersal, may potentially increase the efficiency and effectiveness of management actions. We trapped, conducted aerial shootings, and hunted wild pigs from 2005 to 2009 in southern Texas. We used microsatellites to assist large-scale applied management. We quantify broad-scale population structure among 24 sites across southern Texas by computing an overall FST value, and a Bayesian clustering algorithm both with and without considering the spatial location of samples. At a broad geographic scale, pig populations displayed a moderate degree of genetic structure (FST = 0.11). The best partition for number of populations, based on 2nd order rate of change of the likelihood distribution, was K = 10 genetic clusters. The spatially explicit Bayesian clustering algorithm produced similar results, with minor differences in designation of admixed sites. We found evidence of past (and possibly ongoing) translocations; many populations were admixed. Our original goal was to identify landscape features, such as barriers or dispersal corridors, that could be used to aid management. Unfortunately, the extensive admixture among clusters made this impossible. This research shows that large-scale management of wild pigs may be necessary to achieve control and ameliorate damages. Reduction or cessation of translocations is necessary to prevent human-mediated dispersion of wild pigs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study sites and sampling locations of tissue samples distributed along southern Texas. Study sites are labeled in the figure. Aransas National Wildlife Refuge (AR), Cameron County (CAM), Choke Canyon State Park (CC), Kubala’s Ranch (COD), Comanche Ranch (CR), Cuero County (CU), Don Ricardo pasture, Laureles Division of King Ranch (DR), Duval County (DU), El Pintor Ranch (EP), Jim Hogg County (JH), Jim Wells County (JW), Kenedy Ranch (KEN), Killam Ranch (KIL), Gallito pasture, Laureles Division of King Ranch (KRG), the Texas A&amp;M Extension Service La Copita Research Area (LAC), Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge (LRG), La Salle County (LS), Rancho Escondido (RE), San Diego County (SAD), South Pasture-Texas A&amp;M-Kingsville (SP), Willacy County (WILL), Wilbarger Tract, Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge (WT), Rob and Bessie Welder Wildlife Refuge (WWR), and Santa Gertrudis division of King Ranch (SGE).</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Mantel test based on Ds genetic distance and Euclidean spatial distance (km). There was no relationship between genetic and geographic distance in wild pigs sampled in 24 sites during 2005–2009 in southern Texas, USA.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Geographic distribution of genetic clusters based on the best partition generated in the Bayesian clustering algorithm, Structure 2.2 (<b>a</b>) (assuming K = 10) and in the Bayesian spatial clustering algorithm BAPS 4.2 (<b>b</b>) (assuming K = 12) from wild pigs collected in 24 sites during 2005–2009 in southern Texas, USA.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Wild pigs sampled at 24 sites during 2005–2009 in southern Texas, USA. Each individual is represented by a vertical line, which is partitioned into colored segments that represent the individual’s estimated membership fractions in the K = 10 genetic clusters derived from the Bayesian clustering algorithm Structure 2.2. Sampling sites are labeled below the figure. Aransas National Wildlife Refuge (AR), Cameron County (CAM), Choke Canyon State Park (CC), Kubala’s Ranch (COD), Comanche Ranch (CR), Cuero County (CU), Don Ricardo pasture, Laureles Division of King Ranch (DR), Duval County (DU), El Pintor Ranch (EP), Jim Hogg County (JH), Jim Wells County (JW), Kenedy Ranch (KEN), Killam Ranch (KIL), Gallito pature, Laureles Division of King Ranch (KRG), the Texas A&amp;M Extension Service La Copita Research Area (LAC), Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge (LRG), La Salle County (LS), Rancho Escondido (RE), Santa Gertrudis division of King Ranch (SGE), San Diego County (SAD), South Pasture-Texas A&amp;M-Kingsville (SP), Willacy County (WILL), Wilbarger Tract, Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge (WT), and Rob and Bessie Welder Wildlife Refuge (WWR).</p> Full article ">
17 pages, 2561 KiB  
Article
The Multiple Origins of Roe Deer Populations in Western Iberia and Their Relevance for Conservation
by Tânia Barros, Eduardo Ferreira, Rita Gomes Rocha, Gonçalo Brotas, Juan Carranza, Carlos Fonseca and Rita Tinoco Torres
Animals 2020, 10(12), 2419; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10122419 - 17 Dec 2020
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 3604
Abstract
The roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) is native and widespread in Europe and its phylogeography has been clarified in the last decades. Southern peninsulas are considered as reservoirs of genetic diversity and the source for the recolonization of Europe after the last [...] Read more.
The roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) is native and widespread in Europe and its phylogeography has been clarified in the last decades. Southern peninsulas are considered as reservoirs of genetic diversity and the source for the recolonization of Europe after the last glacial maximum. Even though roe deer populations have been genetically characterized, there is a major knowledge gap about the populations at the western edge of its distribution. To fill this caveat, and based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA data, we aim to: (i) characterize the genetic diversity and structure of roe deer in western Iberia; (ii) clarify the origins and phylogeographical affinities of these populations, namely the relict population from Peneda Gerês National Park (PNPG, Portugal) and the likely allochthonous populations from central and south (CS) Portugal; (iii) discuss the implications of our findings for the management and conservation of the roe deer. Three major genetic clusters were inferred based on nuclear genotypes and were structured in a similar way as the three major mtDNA clades present in Iberia. Patterns inferred with nuclear markers confirmed PNPG as a relict population. Roe deer from CS Portugal share haplotypes with Central Europe rather than with other western Iberian populations, confirming its mainly allochthonous origin. Our results highlight western Iberia as a diversity hotspot for roe deer. We highlight the role of intraspecific genetic diversity as a source of resilience against ongoing global changes; the need for transboundary management and the importance of genetic data to inform management and conservation. When considered, repopulation or translocation measures should follow the IUCN Law of Reintroductions and meticulously conducted in order to preserve the genetic heritage of the species. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Roe Deer genetic diversity, structure and gene flow in Western Iberia. (<b>A</b>) Population average posterior probabilities of assignment to genetic clusters (PGNP, NWI, CSP), inferred from microsatellite genotype data. (<b>B</b>) Population frequency of mtDNA haplotypes belonging to Central (and Iberian subclade), West and Celtic-Iberian clades, after Randi et al. (2004) and Royo et al. (2007). Circle sizes are proportional to sample size. (<b>C</b>) Individual posterior probabilities of assignment to inferred genetic clusters (PGNP, NWI, CSP). (<b>D</b>) Relative migration flows among populations in number of migrants, Nm. Significantly asymmetric migration flow (i.e., gene flow) marked with an asterisk (*—<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05) or a dot (▪—<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.1). Sampling areas: 1—Alentejo; 2—Beiras; 3—Parque Nacional Peneda Gerês; 4—Trás-os-Montes; 5—Valsemana; 6—Asturias; 7—Galica; a—Central and Southern Portugal (1 + 2); b—Nortwesten Iberia (7 + 6).</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Relations among individual genotypes from the five sampled populations. Two-dimensional plot based on the first two variation axes of principal coordinate analysis. Percent of explained variation is reported for each axis. Individual genotypes are color-coded, according to source population.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Median-joining network depicting the phylogenetic relations among haplotypes sampled in this study. Circle size is proportional to haplotype frequency. Circles are colored according to haplotype frequency in each area. Haplotypes clustering within Central (including Iberian subclade), West and Celtic-Iberian clades (following Randi et al., 2004; Royo et al., 2007) are delimited. Each dash among haplotypes represents a mutational step. Black nodes stand for hypothetical (not sampled) ancestral haplotypes.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Median-joining network depicting the phylogenetic relations among haplotypes sampled in this study and haplotypes from all Europe retrieved from Genebank. Circle size is proportional to haplotype frequency. Circles are colored according to haplotype frequency in each area in western Iberia and Europe. Haplotypes clustering within Central (including Iberian subclade), West and Celtic-Iberian clades (following Randi et al., 2004; Royo et al., 2007) are delimited. Each dash among haplotypes represents a mutational step. Black nodes stand for hypothetical (not sampled) ancestral haplotypes.</p> Full article ">

Review

Jump to: Editorial, Research, Other

19 pages, 879 KiB  
Review
Host Genetic Diversity and Infectious Diseases. Focus on Wild Boar, Red Deer and Tuberculosis
by Javier Pérez-González, Juan Carranza, Remigio Martínez and José Manuel Benítez-Medina
Animals 2021, 11(6), 1630; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11061630 - 31 May 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 6406
Abstract
Host genetic diversity tends to limit disease spread in nature and buffers populations against epidemics. Genetic diversity in wildlife is expected to receive increasing attention in contexts related to disease transmission and human health. Ungulates such as wild boar (Sus scrofa) [...] Read more.
Host genetic diversity tends to limit disease spread in nature and buffers populations against epidemics. Genetic diversity in wildlife is expected to receive increasing attention in contexts related to disease transmission and human health. Ungulates such as wild boar (Sus scrofa) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) are important zoonotic hosts that can be precursors to disease emergence and spread in humans. Tuberculosis is a zoonotic disease with relevant consequences and can present high prevalence in wild boar and red deer populations. Here, we review studies on the genetic diversity of ungulates and determine to what extent these studies consider its importance on the spread of disease. This assessment also focused on wild boar, red deer, and tuberculosis. We found a disconnection between studies treating genetic diversity and those dealing with infectious diseases. Contrarily, genetic diversity studies in ungulates are mainly concerned with conservation. Despite the existing disconnection between studies on genetic diversity and studies on disease emergence and spread, the knowledge gathered in each discipline can be applied to the other. The bidirectional applications are illustrated in wild boar and red deer populations from Spain, where TB is an important threat for wildlife, livestock, and humans. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Number of published studies on genetic diversity for the most frequently studied ungulates. Results from a search on the Web of Science with the following search terms: <span class="html-italic">genetic diversity, inbreeding,</span> and <span class="html-italic">ungulates</span> (217 studies were obtained). Studies on genetic diversity of ungulate populations published in scientific journals were selected (204 papers). Total: number of studies on genetic diversity of ungulate populations published in scientific journals. Conservation: number of studies that explicitly related genetic diversity to conservation (papers in which the word ‘conservation’ appeared in the title, abstract, or the name of the journal). Diseases: number of studies that explicitly associated genetic diversity with diseases (papers in which the title, abstract, or name of the journal used at least one of the following terms: ‘disease’, ‘pathogen’, ‘parasite’, any variation of ‘immunity’, or the name of any disease). Bb: <span class="html-italic">Bison bonasus</span>, Bt: <span class="html-italic">Bos taurus</span>, Ce: <span class="html-italic">Cervus elaphus</span>, Cn: <span class="html-italic">Cervus nippon</span>, Ec: <span class="html-italic">Equus caballus</span>, Ol: <span class="html-italic">Oryx leucoryx</span>, Oa: <span class="html-italic">Ovis aries</span>, Oc: <span class="html-italic">Ovis canadensis</span>, Ss: <span class="html-italic">Sus scrofa</span>. The search was last consulted on 15 April 2021. See <a href="#app1-animals-11-01630" class="html-app">Tables S1 and S2</a>.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Studies on tuberculosis in wild boar and red deer populations from 1990 to April 2021. Results from the search on the Web of Science described in <a href="#animals-11-01630-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a> (Selected papers). Colored points indicate the year in which studies explicitly relating tuberculosis to reservoir genetic diversity were published. Red points: studies for wild boar. Blue points: studies for red deer. See <a href="#app1-animals-11-01630" class="html-app">Tables S3 and S4</a>.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Mean and 95% confidence intervals for observed and expected heterozygosity of fetuses in wild boar and red deer females that produced daughters. Expected heterozygosity was obtained after simulating random mating for each species. See description of the analysis in <a href="#animals-11-01630-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>.</p> Full article ">

Other

9 pages, 630 KiB  
Brief Report
Differentiating Pigs from Wild Boars Based on NR6A1 and MC1R Gene Polymorphisms
by Anna Koseniuk, Grzegorz Smołucha, Małgorzata Natonek-Wiśniewska, Anna Radko and Dominika Rubiś
Animals 2021, 11(7), 2123; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11072123 - 17 Jul 2021
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 4161
Abstract
This preliminary study aimed to differentiate domestic pigs from wild boars based on MC1R and NR6A1 polymorphisms and to identify admixture between these genomes. We studied samples obtained from wild boars from two regions of Poland and five pig breeds: Polish Landrace, Polish [...] Read more.
This preliminary study aimed to differentiate domestic pigs from wild boars based on MC1R and NR6A1 polymorphisms and to identify admixture between these genomes. We studied samples obtained from wild boars from two regions of Poland and five pig breeds: Polish Landrace, Polish Large White, Złotnicka White, Pulawska and Duroc. Along the MC1R gene sequence, we identified four polymorphic loci comprising three codons. The “wild type” allele was primarily found in wild boar but also in the Duroc and Złotnicka White breeds. Non-wild type alleles were identified in the vast majority of domestic pig samples and in two wild boar samples. Based on MC1R profiles, we conducted a population study, and revealed admixture between both genomes using STRUCTURE and NETWORK Software. Interestingly, an allelic discrimination assay with NR6A1 g.748C > T TaqMan probes revealed a clear separation of samples into two groups: wild boar samples representing the C allele and domestic breeds representing the T allele. Based on the obtained results, we conclude that NR6A1 g.748C > T is an effective marker for differentiating between wild boars and domestic pigs, where this is supported by MC1R data, to identify admixed profiles. We recommend that a larger sample of genomes is studied to verify this method. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genetic Diversity of Wild Boar and Deer)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>A pattern of <span class="html-italic">MC1R</span> admixed profiles in analysed samples; the computed number of expected population is K = 3; allele sequences are available on GeneBank: E<sup>+</sup> (AF082490, [<a href="#B6-animals-11-02123" class="html-bibr">6</a>]), E<sup>D1</sup> (AF082489, [<a href="#B6-animals-11-02123" class="html-bibr">6</a>]); e (EU443691, [<a href="#B7-animals-11-02123" class="html-bibr">7</a>]), E<sup>P2</sup> (EU443722, [<a href="#B7-animals-11-02123" class="html-bibr">7</a>]), E<sup>D2</sup> (EU443685, [<a href="#B7-animals-11-02123" class="html-bibr">7</a>]), E<sup>P3</sup> (EU443726, [<a href="#B7-animals-11-02123" class="html-bibr">7</a>]).</p> Full article ">
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-6
Back to TopTop