Lack of mitochondrial DNA structure in Balkan donkey is consistent with a quick spread of the species after domestication

Abstract

A total of 132 mtDNA sequences from 10 Balkan donkey populations were analysed to ascertain their regional genetic structure and to contribute to the knowledge of the spreading of the species after domestication. The Balkan donkey sequences were compared with those from 40 Burkina Faso donkeys as an African outgroup to account for possible local Balkan scenarios. The 172 sequences gave 62 different haplotypes (55 in Balkan donkey). Virtually all the analysed populations had haplotypes assigned to either Clade 1 or Clade 2 even though the relative proportion of Clade 1 or 2 haplotypes differed across populations. Geographical maps constructed using factors computed via principal component analysis showed that the Balkan donkey populations are not spatially structured. AMOVA confirmed a lack of genetic structure in Balkan donkey mtDNA. Balkan populations were poorly differentiated (ΦST = 0.071). Differentiation between the Balkan donkey and the African outgroup also was low. The lack of correspondence between geographical areas and maternal genetic structure is consistent with the hypothesis suggesting a very quick spread of the species after domestication. The current research illustrates the difficulties to trace routes of expansion in donkey, as the species has no geographical structure.

Molecular phylogeny of Anatolian and Cypriot donkey populations based on mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomal STRs

“…The values of haplotype and nucleotide diversity (h=0.756±0.0500 and π=0.1688±0.0012) obtained from D-loop sequences of Anatolian donkey population were found to be moderately high, indicating plentiful genetic diversity. Otherwise when h and π values for D-loop region were compared with different donkey populations, Anatolian donkey populations found to be lesser than Ethiopian donkeys (h=0.903±0.032 and π =0.020±0.003) reported by Kefena et al (9), Balkan donkey breeds (h=0.982±0.002 and 0.017±0.009) reported by Pérez-Pardal et al (17), Chinese donkey breeds (0.9055±0.0170 and 0.0228± 0.0117) reported by Chen et al (3); while they were found to be higher than Spanish donkey breeds with values of average 0.421 and 0.007 (1). If it is taken into account the mitochondrial genetic diversity values of the other livestock raised in Turkey, such as goats and cattle, above-mentioned results of Anatolian donkey are unfamiliar (12,16).…”

“…It is thought that the donkey was domesticated about 5000-6000 years ago and they were essentially used for transport and trade during the ancient civilization over decades. Domestication centers and the lineages of the wild ass contributing to modern domestic donkey population, are still unknown, except the contribution of the Nubian wild ass (1,10,17,20). According to archaeological, historical, and ethnographical sources there are at least two distinct groups of wild asses existed in Africa; The Somali Wild (Equus africanus somaliensis) and the Nubian Wild (Equus africanus africanus) (20).…”

Genetic diversity of donkey populations from the putative centers of domestication

“…; Pérez‐Pardal et al . ). This pattern can be explained by some specificity of the donkey and its domestication process, namely the mobile character of the species and the absence of intensive management (artificial selection) in most regions of the word, unlike the closely related horse.…”

Banat donkey, a neglected donkey breed from the central Balkans (Serbia)

“…The donkey breed present today in the Balkan Peninsula is the Balkan donkey, usually regarded as unselected, unstructured and traditionally managed donkey breed (Kugler, Grunenfelder & Broxham, 2008). However, according to Stanisic et al (2017), the history and the current genetic structure of the endangered and depopulated donkey population in the Balkans was much more complex than previously reported (Pérez-Pardal et al, 2014). Furthermore, genetically distinct sub-populations of the Balkan donkey, as well as new breeds that may be acknowledged (e.g., Ivankovic et al, 2002) or those that are neglected, still uncharacterized and brought to the brink of extinction, may be present in this region (Stanisic et al, 2017).…”