http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Cuc, Ngo Thi Kim,Simianer, Henner,Groeneveld, Linn Fenna,Weigend, Steffen Asian Australasian Association of Animal Productio 2011 Animal Bioscience Vol.24 No.2
In this study, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence polymorphism was used to assess genetic diversity of nine Vietnamese local chicken breeds. In addition, two Chinese breeds kept in Vietnam were included in the analysis for comparison. A 455-bp fragment of the mtDNA D-loop region was sequenced in 222 chickens of these 11 breeds. As reference, a skeleton was constructed based on chicken mtDNA sequences taken from the Genbank. Haplotypes of the nine Vietnamese local and two Chinese breeds were aligned together with these sequences. The Vietnamese and Chinese breeds showed a high degree of variability. In total, 37 haplotypes were identified in the chicken breeds studied forming eight clades. Thereby, the majority of individuals of the two Chinese breeds grouped together in one clade which is assumed to have its roots in the Indian subcontinent. Although the Vietnamese chicken breeds were distributed across all eight clades, most of them clustered in three main clades. These results suggest that the Vietnamese domestic chickens have originated from multiple maternal lineages, presumably from Yunnan and adjacent areas in China, South and Southwest China and/or surrounding regions (i.e. Vietnam, Burma, Thailand, and India).
Meydan, Hasan,Jang, Cafer Pish,Yildiz, Mehmet Ali,Weigend, Steffen Asian Australasian Association of Animal Productio 2016 Animal Bioscience Vol.29 No.11
To assess genetic diversity and maternal origin of Turkish and Iranian native chicken breeds, we analyzed the mtDNA D-loop sequences of 222 chickens from 2 Turkish (Denizli and Gerze) and 7 Iranian (White Marandi, Black Marandi, Naked Neck, Common Breed, Lari, West Azarbaijan, and New Hampshire) native chicken breeds, together with the available reference sequences of G. gallus gallus in GenBank. The haplotype diversity was estimated as $0.24{\pm}0.01$ and $0.36{\pm}0.02$ for Turkish and Iranian populations, respectively. In total, 19 haplotypes were observed from 24 polymorphic sites in Turkish and Iranian native chicken populations. Two different clades or haplogroups (A and E) were found in Turkish and Iranian chickens. Clade A haplotypes were found only in White Marandi, Common Breed and New Hampshire populations. Clade E haplotypes, which are quite common, were observed in Turkish and Iranian populations with 18 different haplotypes, of which Turkish and Iranian chickens, Clade E, haplotype 1 (TRIRE1) was a major haplotype with the frequency of 81.5% (181/222) across all breeds. Compared to red jungle fowl, Turkish and Iranian chicken breeds are closely related to each other. These results suggest that Turkish and Iranian chickens originated from the same region, the Indian subcontinent. Our results will provide reliable basic information for mtDNA haplotypes of Turkish and Iranian chickens and for studying the origin of domestic chickens.
Chen, Guohong,Bao, Wenbin,Shu, Jingting,Ji, Congliang,Wang, Minqiang,Eding, Herwin,Muchadeyi, Farai,Weigend, Steffen Asian Australasian Association of Animal Productio 2008 Animal Bioscience Vol.21 No.3
The genetic structure and diversity of 15 Chinese indigenous chicken breeds was investigated using 29 microsatellite markers. The total number of birds examined was 542, on average 36 birds per breed. A total of 277 alleles (mean number 9.55 alleles per locus, ranging from 2 to 25) was observed. All populations showed high levels of heterozygosity with the lowest estimate of 0.440 for the Gushi chickens, and the highest one of 0.644 observed for Wannan Three-yellow chickens. The global heterozygote deficit across all populations (FIT) amounted to 0.180 (p<0.001). About 16% of the total genetic variability originated from differences between breeds, with all loci contributing significantly to this differentiation. An unrooted consensus tree was constructed using the Neighbour-Joining method and pair-wise distances based on marker estimated kinships. Two main groups were found. The heavy-body type populations grouped together in one cluster while the light-body type populations formed the second cluster. The STRUCTURE software was used to assess genetic clustering of these chicken breeds. Similar to the phylogenetic analysis, the heavy-body type and light-body type populations separated first. Clustering analysis provided an accurate representation of the current genetic relations among the breeds. Remarkably similar breed rankings were obtained with all methods.