Heritable load in the geese in the process of creating a dimorphic population
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32636/01308521.2021-(69)-2-14Keywords:
geese, crosses, dimorphic population, dead embryos, anomalies, genetic loadAbstract
The paper presents the results of determining the spectrum and frequency of hereditary genetic defects in embryo development on a wide range of geese. They were the original family forms (Large Gray breed, Rhine breed) of geese, descendants of the first and third generations and the created dimorphic population. At the end of the incubation process among the waste incubation of eggs were selected dead embryos, the so-called "dead". Visual examination of embryos revealed morphological disorders in the structure of the skeleton, as well as various disproportions of individual parts of the body. Morphological and anatomical hereditary defects of embryos were established during pathological and anatomical examination of incubation waste. The level of genetic load in each studied group of birds was determined as the proportion of detected abnormalities in the development of embryos to the total number examined. In geese of a Large Gray breed among the examined dead embryos, one of them had a double anomaly, the frequency of which was 0.65 %. It is obvious that individual-family selection, which is carried out with this bird for a long time, does not contribute to the accumulation and consolidation in its gene pool of "harmful genes". In the Rhine breed geese during all three years of monitoring, hereditary defects in their development were found among the examined dead embryos. The magnitude of the hereditary load was in the range of 1.52-4.00 %. As the difference in this indicator over the years was unbelievable, the fluctuations in the level of genetic load are due to small sawtooth fluctuations in the frequency of lethal genes relative to the average population level in a limited number of Rhine breed geese. No genetic abnormalities were found in the F1 offspring among the examined dead embryos. In the offspring of the second generation among the examined dead embryos were diagnosed with two genetic developmental defects with a frequency of 0.79 % each. The level of genetic load is low and amounted to 1.59 %. It can be assumed that the lethal genes in F1 hybrids were in a heterozygous state and therefore did not appear in them, and in the descendants of F2 some of them went into a homozygous recessive state and showed their effect by the appearance of hereditary defects of embryos. In third-generation geese, one anomaly was diagnosed among the examined embryos, the frequency of which was 1.25 %. It can be assumed that the gene that causes this defect in embryonic development was inherited by F3 geese from a previous generation bird. In geese of the created dimorphic population the level of genetic load is low (2.50 %) and does not represent threat for poultry breeding.
References
1. Ауэрбах С. Проблемы мутагенеза. Москва : Мир, 1978. 463 с.
2. Бондаренко Ю. В., Ткачик Т. Е., Кутнюк П. И. Генетический груз в популяциях сельскохозяйственной птицы. Птицеводство. 2005. Вып. 57. С. 94‒98.
3. Бульченко І. О. Субвітальні мутації сільськогосподарської птиці. Вісник СНАУ. Серія „Тваринництво”. 2012. Вип. 12 (21). С. 93‒96.
4. Генетика / Е. К. Меркурьева и др. Москва : Агропромиздат, 1991. 446 с.
5. Глазко В. И., Глазко Г. В. Введение в генетику, биоинформатика, ДНК-технология, генная терапия, ДНК-экология, протеомика, метаболика. Киев : КВІЦ, 2003. 640 с.
6. Дубинин Н. П. Общая генетика. Москва : Наука, 1986. 561 с.
7. Коган З. М. Признаки экстерьера и интерьера у кур (генетика и хозяйственное значение). Новосибирск : Наука, 1979. 295 с.
8. Орлов М. В. Биологический контроль в инкубации. Москва : Россельхозиздат, 1987. 223 с.
9. Отрыганьев Г. К., Бессарабов Б. Ф., Исаев Ю. В. Болезни эмбрионов птиц. Москва : Россельхозиздат, 1981. 136 с.
10. Отрыганьев Г. К. Уродства эмбрионов и летальные гены. Птицеводство. 1976. № 12. С. 24‒25.
11. Прокудина Н. А. Анализ причин эмбриональной смертности кур мясного и мясо-яичного направления продуктивности. Материалы IV Укр. конф. по птицеводству с международным участием „Актуальные проблемы современного птицеводства” (Алушта, 15‒18 сент. 2008 г.). Харьков, 2008. С. 161‒168.
12. Прокудіна Н. Генетичний «тягар». Наше птахівництво. 2014. № 3 (33). С. 24‒28.
13. Прокудіна Н. Тривале зберігання яєць. Наше птахівництво. 2019. № 2. С. 24‒27.
14. Прокудіна Н. Чому рано гинуть зародки. Наше птахівництво. 2014. № 5 (35). С. 24‒27.
15. Тишенков А. Н. Методические рекомендации для зоотехнических лабораторий птицеводческих предприятий. Загорск, 1982. С. 104.
16. Хвостик В. П., Бондаренко Ю. В. Методические подходы к выведению аутосексных гусей. Актуальные проблемы интенсивного развития животноводства. 2018. Вып. 21, ч. 1. С. 110‒116.
17. Хвостик В. П., Бондаренко Ю. В. Спадковий тягар у популяціях курей вітчизняного генофонду. Вісник СНАУ. Серія „Тваринництво”. 2016. Вип. 7 (30). С. 112‒114.
18. Храброва Л. А. Наследственные дефекты лошадей: диагностика и профилактика. VetPharma. 2014. № 4. С. 86‒96.
19. Andersson L. Mutations in Domestic Animals Disrupting or Creating Pigmentation Patterns. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2020. V. 8. P. 116‒123. DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2020.00116.
20. A non-coding regulatory variant in the 5’-region of the MITF gene is associated with white-spotted coat in Brown Swiss cattle / S. Hofstetter et al. Anim. Genet. 2019. V. 50. P. 27–32. DOI: 10.1111/age.12751.
21. A survey of functional genomic variation in domesticated chickens
/ M. F. L. Derks et al. Genetics Selection Evolution. 2018. V. 50, N 17. DOI: 10.1186/s12711-018-0390-1.
22. A systematic survey to identify lethal recessive variation in highly managed pig populations / M. F. L. Derks et al. BMC Genomics. 2017. V. 18, N 858. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-017-4278-1.
23. Ellis–van Creveld Syndrome in Grey Alpine Cattle: Morphologic, Immunophenotypic, and Molecular Characterization / L. Muscatello et al. Vet. Pathol. 2015. V. 30, N 34. P. 67‒82. DOI: 10.1177/0300985815588610.
24. Genetic disorders in beef cattle: a review / A. Cieploch et al. Genes Genomics. 2017. V. 39, N 5. P. 461‒471. DOI: 10.1007/s13258-017-0525-8.
25. Identification of a nonsense mutation in APAF1 that is likely causal for a decrease in reproductive efficiency in Holstein dairy cattle / Н. А. Adams et al. Journal of Dairy Science. 2016. V. 99, N 8. P. 6693‒6701. DOI: 10.3168jds.2015-10517.
26. Large animal models of rare genetic disorders: sheep as phenotypically relevant models of human genetic disease
/ A. R. Pinnapureddy et al. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases. 2015. V. 10, N 107. P. 89‒102. DOI: 10.1186/s13023-015-0327-5.
27. NGS-based reverse genetic screen for common embryonic lethal mutations compromising fertility in livestock
/ C. Charlier et al. Genome Research. 2016. V. 26, N 10. Р. 1333‒1341. DOI: 10.1101/gr.207076.116.
28. Raudsepp T., Chowdhary B. P. Chromosome aberrations and fertility disorders in domestic animals. Annual Review of Animal Biosciences. 2016. V. 4. P. 15‒43. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-animal-021815-111239.
29. Smeds L., Qvarnström A., Ellegren H. Direct estimate of the rate of germline mutation in a bird. Genome Research. 2016. V. 26. P. 211‒218. DOI: 10.1101/gr.204669.116.
30. Somes R. G. Jr. Lethal mutant traits in chickens. Poultry Breeding and Genetics. 1990. Ch. 11. P. 293‒316.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 В. П. ХВОСТИК (Автор)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.




