Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T04:49:56.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

UK rare breeds: population genetic analyses and implications for applied conservation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

S.J. Townsend
S.J. Townsend*
Affiliation:
Rare Breeds Survival Trust, NAC, Stoneleigh Park, Warwickshire, CV8 2LG, UK
Get access

Abstract

Since the establishment of the Rare Breeds Survival Trust (RBST) in 1973, rare breed genetic conservation has only gradually emerged as a major key to the continued success and survival of populations. Thus, although basic population and demographic data have been recorded for all breeds listed by the Trust and most rare breeds have kept detailed pedigrees, there is still little information available about current population genetic structure and dynamics over time. Consequently, the majority of rare breed population meta-analyses based upon pedigree data are yet to be carried out. Transfer of rare breed records onto a computer database is therefore a current priority for the RBST, in addition to making available software to provide rare breed organisations with breed profiles to describe founder effects, effective population size (Ne), rate of inbreeding (ΔF), and kinship patterns. Results from rare breed pedigree analyses using this software can now be used to a) illustrate where and how loss of genetic diversity has taken place in rare breeds and b) enable decision processes concerning conservation strategy in future. Conservation strategy informed by such analyses can only be successfully implemented if due regard is given to the realities imposed by the need to maintain rare breed populations within an agricultural context, however. In light of these recent improvements to data recording and access to studies of population genetic structure, some of the traditional limitations to advances to rare breed conservation strategy may now need to be re-examined.

Type
Section 4: Conservation in action
Information
BSAP Occasional Publication , Volume 30: Farm Animal Genetic Resources , 2004 , pp. 299 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bijlsma, R., Bundgaard, J., Boerema, A.C. 2000. Does inbreeding affect the extinction risk of small populations? Predictions from Drosophila. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 13 (3): 502–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouzat, J.L., Lewin, H.A., Paige, K.N. 1998. The ghost of genetic diversity past: historical DNA analysis of the greater prairie chicken. American Naturalist 152: 1–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caballero, A. and Toro, M.A. 2000. Interrelations between effective population size and other pedigree tools for the management of conserved populations. Genetical Research 75 (3): 331–343.Google Scholar
Caballero, A. and Toro, M.A. 2002. Analysis of genetic diversity for the management of conserved subdivided populations. Conservation Genetics 3 (3): 289–299.Google Scholar
Cymbron, T., Loftus, R.T., Malheiro, M.I., Bradley, D.G. 1999. Mitochondrial sequence variation suggests an African influence in Portuguese cattle Proceedings of the Royal Society, London B 266: 597–603.Google Scholar
Frankham, R. 1996. Relationship of genetic variation to population size in in wildlife. Conservation Biology 10: 1500–1508.Google Scholar
Frankham, R. and Weber, K.E. 2000. Nature of quantitative genetic variation. In: Evolutionary Genetics: from molecules to morphology. Edited by Singh, R.S. & Krimbas, C.B.. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. pp. 351–368.Google Scholar
Goldstein, D.B., Roemer, G.W., Smith, D.A., Reich, D.E., Bergman, A., Wayne, R.K. 1999. The use of microsatellite variation to infer population structure and demographic history in a natural model system. Genetics 151: 797–801.Google Scholar
Hedrick, P.W., Kalinowski, S.T. 2000. Inbreeding depression in conservation biology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31: 139–162.Google Scholar
Lande, R. 1998. Anthropogenic, ecological and genetic factors in extinction and conservation. Researches on Population Ecology 40 (3): 259–269.Google Scholar
Nieminen, M., Singer, M.C., Fortelius, W., Schops, K., Hanski, I. 2001. Experimental confirmation that inbreeding depression increases extinction risk in butterfly populations. American Naturalist 157 (2): 237–244.Google Scholar
Paetku, D., Amstrup, S.C., Born, E.W., Calvert, W., Derocher, A.E., Garner, G.W., Messier, F., Stirling, I., Taylor, M.K., Wiig, O., Strobeck, C. 1999. Genetic structure of the worlds polar bear populations. Molecular Ecology 8:1571–1584.Google Scholar
Taylor, A.C., Sherwin, W.B., Wayne, R.K. 1994. Genetic variation of microsatellite loci in a bottlenecked species: the northern hairynosed wombat. Molecular Ecology 3: 277–290.Google Scholar
Townsend, S. J. 2002. RBST Breed Society Survey, RBST Publications. Stoneleigh, UK Google Scholar
Woodworth, L.M., Montgomery, M.E., Briscoe, D.A., Frankham, R. 2002. Rapid genetic deterioration in captive populations: Causes and conservation implications. Conservation Genetics 3(3): 277–288.Google Scholar