Genetic diversity and population structure of the Guinea pig (Cavia porcellus, Rodentia, caviidae) in Colombia

Abstract

The aim was to establish the genetic diversity and population structure of three guinea pig lines, from seven production zones located in Nariño, southwest Colombia. A total of 384 individuals were genotyped with six microsatellite markers. The measurement of intrapopulation diversity revealed allelic richness ranging from 3.0 to 6.56, and observed heterozygosity (Ho) from 0.33 to 0.60, with a deficit in heterozygous individuals. Although statistically significant (p < 0.05), genetic differentiation between population pairs was found to be low. Genetic distance, as well as clustering of guinea-pig lines and populations, coincided with the historical and geographical distribution of the populations. Likewise, high genetic identity between improved and native lines was established. An analysis of group probabilistic assignment revealed that each line should not be considered as a genetically homogeneous group. The findings corroborate the absorption of native genetic material into the improved line introduced into Colombia from Peru. It is necessary to establish conservation programs for native-line individuals in Nariño, and control genealogical and production records in order to reduce the inbreeding values in the populations.

Genetic diversity and structure of domestic cavy (Cavia porcellus) populations from smallholder farms in southern Cameroon

“…The high rate of inbreeding (0.60) observed in the studied populations could help explain the low rates of observed and expected heterozygosity. On the other hand, the largest deviation from expected heterozygosity (0.499 across all loci for Mémé) was lower than that reported by Burgos-Paz et al ( 2011 ).…”

“…These results differ from those obtained by Kanitz et al ( 2009 ), who observe a balance for all markers in C. aperea , but deviation in the loci cavy1, 5 and 10 in C. magna . Burgos-Paz et al ( 2011 ) record a deviation from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium at 4 out of 5 loci in three lines of domestic cavy in Colombia (native cavy, improved and tame cavy). These results show that, as long as there is restricted flock size, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium is deviated in some loci.…”

“…Sixteen microsatellite markers previously reported for the species Cavia porcellus were evaluated (Spotorno et al 2004;Kanitz et al 2009;Burgos et al 2011). PCR amplification was carried out in C1000 thermal cycler (Bio-Rad).…”

“…However, the use of molecular markers in domestic cavy to reveal diversity patterns is recent and limited to few populations from South America (Spotorno et al 2004;Kanitz et al 2009;Burgos et al 2011) and, only lately, from Africa for the Côte d'Ivoire cavy population (Kouakou et al 2015). It is, therefore, necessary to extend these studies to populations in other African countries for better understanding cavy genetic diversity to help to guide cavy breeding in sub-Saharan Africa.…”

Variabilidad genética de dos subpoblaciones de Cuyes (Cavia porcellus) nativos del sur del Ecuador

“…Todos los marcadores amplificaron exitosamente en los C ecuatorianos, excepto el locus MS II que no logró amplificar. La población de animales nativos mostró un número de alelos considerable, con un promedio de 9,8 ± 3,6, oscilando dichos valores entre 7 y 16 en los loci MS III y MS IV, respectivamente, diferenciándose marcadamente este último de los otros cuatro El número de alelos encontrado en los diferentes locus, se ubican en un rango de 7 a 9 excepto en el MS IV que es mucho mayor; el valor promedio 9,8 obtenido, resultó menor a lo reportado para una muestra de animales nativos del altiplano de Ecuador, investigación que tomó en cuenta un mayor número de microsatélites incluidos dos de los estudiados [5], aunque fue superior a lo encontrado en C nativos colombianos [7] y muy superior a lo encontrado en las poblaciones de C estudiadas en Camerún [6] y Costa de Marfil [14], posiblemente estos dos últimos estuvieron bajo efecto de posibles apareamientos consanguineos. La no amplificacion del marcador MSII pudo deberse a que se trabajó con una especie diferente para la que originalmente fue diseñado (C. aperea), aspecto encontrado también por Burgos y col. [7], confirmándose que dicho marcador no debe ser usado para estudios en C. porcellus.…”