Scholarly article on topic 'Genetic diversity of a large set of horse breeds raised in France assessed by microsatellite polymorphism'

Genetic diversity of a large set of horse breeds raised in France assessed by microsatellite polymorphism Academic research paper on "Biological sciences"

CC BY
0
0
Share paper
Academic journal
Genetics Selection Evolution
OECD Field of science
Keywords
{""}

Academic research paper on topic "Genetic diversity of a large set of horse breeds raised in France assessed by microsatellite polymorphism"

Genetics Selection Evolution

BioMed Central

Correction

Genetic diversity of a large set of horse breeds raised in France assessed by microsatellite polymorphism

Grégoire Leroy*1'2, Lucille Callède1'2, Etienne Verrier1'2, JeanClaude Mériaux3, Anne Ricard4, Coralie Danchin-Burge1'2 and Xavier Rognon1,2

Open Access

Address: ^groParisTech, UMR1236 Génétique et Diversité Animales, 16 rue Claude Bernard, F-75321 Paris, France, 2INRA, UMR1236 Génétique et Diversité Animales, 78352 Jouy-en-Josas, France, 3LABOGENA, F-78352 Jouy-en-Josas, France and 4INRA, UR631 Station d'amélioration génétique des animaux, BP 52627, 31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France

Email: Grégoire Leroy* - gregoire.leroy@agroparistech.fr; Lucille Callède - lcallede@gmail.com; Etienne Verrier - etienne.verrier@agroparistech.fr; Jean-Claude Mériaux - Jean-Claude.Meriaux@jouy.inra.fr; Anne Ricard - Anne.Ricard@toulouse.inra.fr; Coralie Danchin-Burge - coralie.danchin@inst-elevage.asso.fr; Xavier Rognon - Xavier.Rognon@jouy.inra.fr * Corresponding author

Published: 19 March 2009 Received: 12 March 2009

Genetics Selection Evolution 2009, 41:31 doi:10.1186/1297-9686-41 -31 Accepted: 19 March 2009

This article is available from: http://www.gsejournal.org/content/41/1/31 © 2009 Leroy et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

After the recent publication of our article (Leroy, Genetics Selection Evolution 2009 41:5), we found several errors in the published Table Three, concerning the computation of contribution to within-breed diversity (CW). We apologize to the readers for these errors, which are corrected in the present erratum.

Correction

Table Three (see Table 1 of this erratum) of our recently published paper [1] contains several errors. Here we present the corrected version of Table Three (see Table 2 of this erratum) and explain the new data. The authors regret the errors.

Results

Partition of diversity

Errors concern the computation of the CW component developed by Ollivier and Foulley [2]. In the new version, CW ranged from -1 to 0.78. As aggregate diversity D is defined as a linear combination of CW and contribution to between-breed diversity, column D had also to be corrected, and ranged from -0.30 to 1.18. Consequently, the Pearson correlation between CW and AGDWS was found to be -1 (instead of -0.72 in the previous version), and the

Pearson correlation between D and AGDTwas found to be -0.59 (P = 0.008).

Discussion Conservation priorities

In spite of the above modifications, the populations that contributed most to the total diversity, according to the approaches of Ollivier and Foulley [2] and Caballero and Toro [3], still remain mostly the non-endangered breeds (AR, PFS, TF) [instead of AR, PS, SF, TF in the previous version].

On the contrary, when considering the eight breeds classified as endangered or endangered/maintained by the FAO (ARD, AUX, BOUL, LAND, MER, POIT, POT, TDN) and the approach of Ollivier and Foulley [2], a change is noted for the breeds exhibiting the highest contributions to

Table 1: Original and incorrect Table Three presented in Leroy et al. (2009)

Breed Nb of breeding animals Pr. Agregate diversity and cryopreservation Loss or gain of diversity when a breed is

code in 2005 extinction potential removed and contributions to optimal diversity

(Ollivier and Foulley, 2005) (Caballero and Toro, 2002)

Males Females CW CB D CP AGDWS AGDbs AGDT C

AA 0.11 0.35 0.85 0.39 0.10 -0.0013 -0.0018 -0.003 1 0%

AR 480 2 130 0.03 0.29 10.90 1.25 0.35 -0.0015 -0.0010 -0.0026 0%

ARD 187 1 417 0.08 -0.48 1.33 -0.32 0.10 0.0031 0.0001 0.0032 0%

AUX 24 248 0.57 -0.19 3.14 0.11 1.79 0.0023 -0.0005 0.0018 0%

BOUL 58 540 0.24 -0.27 12.35 0.87 2.95 0.0040 -0.0023 0.0018 6%

BR 621 6 380 0.02 -0.38 5.57 0.16 0.12 0.0016 0.0009 0.0024 0%

CAM 1 18 837 0.12 0.00 7.99 0.73 0.97 -0.0018 0.0013 -0.0006 0%

COBND 63 760 0.21 -0.06 2.42 0.16 0.52 -0.0017 0.0019 0.0002 2%

COMT 856 7 073 0.02 -0.25 3.63 0.11 0.06 0.0000 0.0015 0.0015 0%

LAND 22 73 0.74 0.06 3.99 0.41 2.95 -0.0029 0.0016 -0.0014 2%

MER 93 1 012 0.15 -0.04 10.41 0.91 1.53 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0%

PER 183 2 461 0.07 -0.32 4.60 0.12 0.34 0.0006 0.0014 0.0020 0%

PFS 100 949 0.14 0.39 1.93 0.53 0.27 -0.0055 0.0024 -0.003 1 70%

POIT 39 199 0.38 -0.43 12.60 0.75 4.83 0.0069 -0.0030 0.0039 0%

POT 94 910 0.15 0.19 1.33 0.29 0.20 -0.0040 0.0024 -0.0016 5%

PS 369 8 049 0.04 0.50 6.17 1.02 0.22 -0.0001 -0.0041 -0.0042 1%

SF 474 1 1 700 0.03 0.45 1.33 0.53 0.04 -0.0024 -0.0013 -0.0037 15%

TDN 16 183 0.85 -0.17 1.93 0.02 1.64 0.0032 -0.0009 0.0022 0%

TF 527 15 950 0.02 0.36 7.51 1.01 0.18 -0.0002 -0.0029 -0.0032 0%

-0.043

CW = contribution to within-breed diversity; CB = contribution to between-breed diversity; D = aggregate diversity;CP = cryopreservation potential; AGDWS = loss or gain of gene diversity within populations when breed is removed; AGDbs = loss or gain of gene diversity between populations when breed is removed; AGDT = loss or gain of total diversity when the breed is removed; Ç = contribution of the breed to optimise GDT

Table 2: Corrected Table Three

Breed code

Nb of breeding animals in 2005

Pr. Agregate diversity and cryopreservation

Extinction potential

(Ollivier and Foulley, 2005)

Loss or gain of diversity when a breed is removed and contributions to optimal diversity (Caballero and Toro, 2002)

Females

AA 119 1 443 0.11 0.18 0.85 0.24 0.10 -0.0013 -0.0018 -0.003 1 0%

AR 480 2 130 0.03 0.21 10.90 1.18 0.35 -0.0015 -0.0010 -0.0026 0%

ARD 187 1 417 0.08 -0.46 1.33 -0.30 0.10 0.0031 0.0001 0.0032 0%

AUX 24 248 0.57 -0.32 3.14 -0.01 1.79 0.0023 -0.0005 0.0018 0%

BOUL 58 540 0.24 -0.60 12.35 0.57 2.95 0.0040 -0.0023 0.0018 6%

BR 621 6 380 0.02 -0.24 5.57 0.29 0.12 0.0016 0.0009 0.0024 0%

CAM 1 18 837 0.12 0.27 7.99 0.97 0.97 -0.0018 0.0013 -0.0006 0%

COBND 63 760 0.21 0.24 2.42 0.44 0.52 -0.0017 0.0019 0.0002 2%

COMT 856 7 073 0.02 -0.01 3.63 0.32 0.06 0.0000 0.0015 0.0015 0%

LAND 22 73 0.74 0.48 3.99 0.79 2.95 -0.0029 0.0016 -0.0014 2%

MER 93 1 012 0.15 0.02 10.41 0.96 1.53 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0%

PER 183 2 461 0.07 -0.10 4.60 0.33 0.34 0.0006 0.0014 0.0020 0%

PFS 100 949 0.14 0.78 1.93 0.89 0.27 -0.0055 0.0024 -0.003 1 70%

POIT 39 199 0.38 -1.00 12.60 0.23 4.83 0.0069 -0.0030 0.0039 0%

POT 94 910 0.15 0.58 1.33 0.64 0.20 -0.0040 0.0024 -0.0016 5%

PS 369 8 049 0.04 0.01 6.17 0.57 0.22 -0.0001 -0.0041 -0.0042 1%

SF 474 1 1 700 0.03 0.34 1.33 0.43 0.04 -0.0024 -0.0013 -0.0037 15%

TDN 16 183 0.85 -0.41 1.93 -0.20 1.64 0.0032 -0.0009 0.0022 0%

TF 527 15 950 0.02 0.02 7.51 0.70 0.18 -0.0002 -0.0029 -0.0032 0%

Sum 0 100 9.054 0 -0.043 0.043 100%

CW = contribution to within-breed diversity; CB = contribution to between-breed diversity; D = aggregate diversity;CP = cryopreservation potential; AGDws = loss or gain of gene diversity within populations when breed is removed; AGDbS = loss or gain of gene diversity between populations when breed is removed; AGDt = loss or gain of total diversity when the breed is removed; C: = contribution of the breed to optimise GDt

aggregate diversity D, which are now MER, LAND and POT, instead of BOUL, MER and POIT.

Finally, since the discussion on breed conservation is based on the use of several other methods and parameters, the above new results do not change our recommendations on which breeds specifically need support.

References

1. Leroy G, Callede L, Verrier E, Mériaux JC, Ricard A, Danchin-Burge C, Rognon X: Genetic diversity of a large set of horse breeds raised in France assessed by microsatellite polymorphism. Genet Sel Evol 2009, 41:5.

2. Ollivier L, Foulley JL: Aggregate diversity: New approach combining within- and between-breed genetic diversity. Livest Prod Sci 2005, 95:247-254.

3. Caballero A, Toro MA: Analysis of genetic diversity for the management of conserved subdivided populations. Conserv Genet 2002, 3:289-299.

Publish with BioMecl Central and every scientist can read your work free of charge

BioMed Central will be the most significant development for

disseminating the results of biomedical research in our lifetime." Sir Paul Nurse, Cancer Research UK

Your research papers will be:

• available free of charge to the entire biomedical community

peer reviewed and published immediately upon acceptance cited in PubMed and archived on PubMed Central yours — you keep the copyright

Submit your manuscript here:

http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/publishing_adv.asp

BioMedcentral