Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T04:16:00.298Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

AFLP fingerprinting analysis of genetic polymorphism of 12 indigenous chicken breeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2007

Gao Yu-Shi*
Affiliation:
Institute of Poultry, Academy of Agriculture Sciences in China, Yangzhou 225003, Jiangsu, China
Tu Yun-Jie
Affiliation:
Institute of Poultry, Academy of Agriculture Sciences in China, Yangzhou 225003, Jiangsu, China
Tong Hai-Bing
Affiliation:
Institute of Poultry, Academy of Agriculture Sciences in China, Yangzhou 225003, Jiangsu, China
Wang Ke-Hua
Affiliation:
Institute of Poultry, Academy of Agriculture Sciences in China, Yangzhou 225003, Jiangsu, China
Chen Kuan-Wei
Affiliation:
Institute of Poultry, Academy of Agriculture Sciences in China, Yangzhou 225003, Jiangsu, China
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

A total of six amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) primer combinations were used to detect genetic variation of pooled DNA in a sample of 12 chicken breeds indigenous to China, and AFLP DNA fingerprinting of each chicken breed was constructed. Polymorphic bands, specific bands and genetic similarity coefficients of 12 chicken breeds were calculated from AFLP data. A total of 279 polymorphic bands were generated by the six primer combinations, giving, on average, 46.5 polymorphic markers detected per primer combination. Nine specific bands were produced in the pooled DNA of Jiuyuan black and Dongxiang black chickens. However, one specific band was produced in the pooled DNA of Wenchang and Xingyi bantam chickens. An unweighted-pair-group method using average linkages (UPGMA) cluster analysis revealed that the 12 chicken breeds could be divided into three groups. Genetic similarity coefficients and the UPGMA tree of the 12 chicken breeds were consistent with their breeding history as well as their geographical distribution. Based on AFLP DNA fingerprinting, genetic diversity, genetic relationship and identification of chicken breeds can be analysed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © China Agricultural University and Cambridge University Press 2007

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.)

Footnotes

First published in Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology 2006, 14(4): 498–502

References

Arnold, C, Metherell, LG, Willshaw, G, Maggs, A and Stanley, J (1999) Predictive fluorescent amplified-fragment length polymorphism analysis of Escherichia coli: high-resolution typing method with phylogenetic significance. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 37: 12741279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruinsma, N, Willems, RJL, van den Bogaard, AE, et al. (2002) Different levels of genetic homogeneity in vancomycin-resistant and susceptible Enterococcus faecium isolates from different human and animal sources analyzed by amplified-fragment length polymorphism. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 46(9): 27792783.Google Scholar
Cathey, JC, DeWoody, JA and Smith, LM (1998) Brief communication: Microsatellite markers in Canada geese (Branta canadensis). Journal of Heredity 89(2): 173175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, YS, Li, HF, Chen, GH, Tu, YJ, Wang, KH and Chen, KW (2005) Construction of microsatellite DNA fingerprinting and analysis of genetic variation of native chicken breeds. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University 20(3): 313318 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Geornaras, I, Kunene, NF, von Holy, A and Hastings, JW (1999) Amplified fragment length polymorphism fingerprinting of Pseudomonas strains from a poultry processing plant. Microbiology 65(9): 38283833.Google Scholar
Hu, HH, Lan, R and Reeves, PR (2002) Fluorescent amplified fragment length polymorphism analysis of Salmonella enterica serovar typhimurium reveals phage-type-specific markers and potential for microarray typing. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 40(9): 34063415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kumar, S, Tamura, K and Nei, M (2004) MEGA3: Integrated software for molecular evolutionary genetics analysis and sequence alignment. Briefings in Bioinformatics 5: 150163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lan, R and Reeves, PR (2000) Unique adaptor design for AFLP fingerprinting. BioTechniques 29: 745750.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lan, R and Reeves, PR (2002) Pandemic spread of cholera: genetic diversity and relationships within the seventh pandemic clone of Vibrio cholerae determined by amplified fragment length polymorphism. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 40: 172181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, ZJ, Karsi, A, Li, P, Cao, DF and Dunham, R (2003) An AFLP-based genetic linkage map of channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) constructed by using an interspecific hybrid resource family. Genetics 165: 687694.Google Scholar
Nei, M and Li, WH (1979) Mathematical model for studying genetic variations in terms of restriction endonucleases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 76: 52695273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sreekumar, GP, Smyth, JR and Ponce, FA (2001) Molecular characterization of the smyth chicken sublines and their parental controls by RFLP and DNA fingerprint analysis. Poultry Science 80: 15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vos, P, Hogers, R, Bleeker, M, et al. (1995) AFLP: a new technique for DNA fingerprinting. Nucleic Acids Research 23: 44074414.Google Scholar
Wan, CL, Zhu, YF and Tan, YD (1999) Application of AFLP markers to detecting genetic polymorphic loci in silkworm. Biotechnology 9(5): 49 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Zhang, R, Zhang, B and Ye, H (1997) Identification of the Chinese herbs of Indigoferae L. by RAPD analysis. Journal of Chinese Materia Medica 22(2): 7276 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google ScholarPubMed
Zhang, X, Leung, FC, Chan, DK, Chen, Y and Wu, C (2002) Comparative analysis of allozyme, random amplified polymorphic DNA and microsatellite polymorphism on Chinese native chickens. Poultry Science 81: 10931098.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed