Search

Two methods have been developed for the assessment of conservation priorities on the basis of molecular markers. According to the Weitzman approach, contributions to genetic diversity are derived from genetic distances between populations. Alternatively, diversity within and across populations is optimized by minimizing marker-estimated kinships. We have applied, for the first time, both methods to a comprehensive data set of 69 European cattle breeds, including all cosmopolitan breeds and several local breeds, for which genotypes of 30 microsatellite markers in 25-50 animals per breed have been obtained. Both methods were used to calculate the gain in diversity if a breed was added to a set of nine non-endangered breeds. Weitzman-derived diversities were confounded by genetic drift in isolated populations, which dominates the genetic distances but does not necessarily increase the conservation value of a breed. Marker-estimated kinships across populations were less disturbed by genetic drift than the Weitzman diversities and assigned high conservation values to Mediterranean breeds, which indeed have genetic histories that differ from the non-endangered breeds. Prospects and limitations of marker-assisted decisions on conservation priorities are discussed.

The valorisation of typical cheeses meets the needs of preserving the local country culture and tradition as well of guaranteeing consumer health by the control of all the steps of production (herd, milk quality, cheese making technology). Among the variability factors significantly affecting cheese peculiarity, biodiversity plays an important role (Gandini et al., 1996; Pieragostini et al., 2002). The possibility of identifying or tracing the primary product, mainly the origin breed, by the use of biologic markers, is an important goal for the safeguard and valorisation of national goat cheese. In this field great interest is paid to milk protein genetic polymorphism. A first study was carried out in order to investigate the possibility of tracing the source milk in dairy products. In particular, the use of molecular techniques for the detection of casein polymorphisms.........

Chantier qualité GA Liste des auteurs de l'European Cattle Genetic Consortium, classés par pays : Austria: R. Baumung, S. Manatrinon, BOKU University, Vienna; Belgium: G. Mommens, University of Ghent, Merelbeke; Denmark: L.-E. Holm, Aarhus University, Tjele; K.B. Withen, B.V. Pedersen, P. Gravlund, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen; Estonia: H. Viinalass, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu; Finland: J. Kantanen, I. Tapio, M.H. Li, MTT, Jokioinen; France: K. Moazami-Goudarzi, M. Gautier, Denis Laloë, INRA, Jouy-en-Josas; A. Oulmouden, H. Levéziel, INRA, Limoges; P. Taberlet, Université Joseph Fourier et CNRS, Grenoble; Germany: B. Harlizius, School of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover; H. Simianer, H. Täubert, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen; G. Erhardt, O. Jann, C. Weimann, E.-M. Prinzenberg, Justus-Liebig Universität, Giessen; I. Medugorac, A. Medugorac, M. Förster, Ludwig-Maximilians Universität, Munich; H.M. Mix, Naturschutz International, Grünheide; C. Looft, E. Kalm, Christian-Albrechts-Universität, Kiel; Ireland: D.G. Bradley, C.J. Edwards, D.E. MacHugh, A.R. Freeman, Trinity College, Dublin; Italy: P. Ajmone Marsan, R. Negrini, Università Cattolica del S. Cuore, Piacenza; M. Longeri, G. Ceriotti, M. Zanotti, Università degli Studi di Milano; D. Marletta, A. Criscione, Universita degli Studi di Catania, Catania; A. Valentini, C. Marchitelli, L. Pariset, M.C. Savarese, Università della Tuscia, Viterbo; F. Pilla, Università del Molise, Campobasso; Latvia: Z. Grislis, Latvia University of Agriculture, Jelgava; Lithuania: I. Miceikienė, Lithuanian Veterinary Academy, Kaunas; Netherlands: I.J. Nijman, Utrecht University; W. van Haeringen, L. van de Goor, Van Haeringen Laboratory, Wageningen; Norway: I. Olsaker, Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, Oslo; Portugal: C. Ginja, L.T.Gama, Instituto Nacional de Recursos Biológicos—INIA, Lisbon University, Lisboa; L.T. Gama, Instituto Nacional de Recursos Biológicos-INIA, I.P., Vale de Santarem; J.C. Mateus, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real; A. Beja-Pereira, N. Ferrand, Oporto University; Russia: Z. Ivanova, R. Popov, I. Ammosov, Yakutian Research Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Yakutsk, Sakha; T. Kiselyova, All-Russian Research Institute for Farm Animals and Breeding, St. Petersburgh-Pushkin; N. Marzanov, All-Russian Research Institute of Animal Husbandry, Dubrovitsy; Serbia: S. Stojanovic, Ministry of Agriculture and Water Management, Belgrade; Slovenia: M. Simčič, P. Dovč, D.Kompan, University of Ljubljana, Domzale; Spain: S. Dunner, Universidad Complutense de Madrid; C. Rodellar, I. Martín-Burriel, Veterinary Faculty, Zaragoza; A. Sánchez, J. Piedrafita, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; P.J. Azor, J.V. Delgado, A. Martínez-Martínez, A. Molina, E. Rodero, University of Córdoba; Switzerland: G. Dolf, University of Berne; UK: J.L. Williams, P. Wiener, Roslin Institute; M.W. Bruford, T.C. Bray, Cardiff University, Cardiff; L. Alderson, Countrywide Livestock Ltd, Shrewsbury; USA: M.C.T. Penedo. University of California, Davis, CA; International audience; Classification of cattle breeds contributes to our understanding of the history of cattle and is essential for an effective conservation of genetic diversity. Here we review the various classifications over the last two centuries and compare the most recent classifications with genetic data. The classifications devised during the 19th to the late 20th century were in line with the Linnaean taxonomy and emphasized cranial or horn morphology. Subsequent classifications were based on coat color, geographic origin or molecular markers. Several theories were developed that linked breed characteristics either to a supposed ancestral aurochs subspecies or to a presumed ethnic origin. Most of the older classifications have now been discarded, but have introduced several Latin terms that are still in use. The most consistent classification was proposed in 1995 by Felius and emphasizes the geographic origin of breeds. This is largely in agreement with the breed clusters indicated by a biochemical and molecular genetic analysis, which reflect either groups of breeds with a common geographic origin or single breeds that have expanded by export and/or crossbreeding. We propose that this information is also relevant for managing the genetic diversity of cattle.

Milk proteins stili cause much interest because of the proven effects of the most common milk genetic polymorphisms on quantitative and qualitative milk production, as well as on milk technological properties. Hence, polymorphisms both at the coding and non-coding regions have to be considered in order to assess which ones are responsible for the variations in milk traits and could be included in breeding programs. The microarray technology provides for an accurate, inexpensive and high-throughput assay highly suitable for the animaI genotyping. Here we describe an application of this technology to the detection of SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphism) at bovine genes involved in milk production in Brown Swiss cattle. Target sequences include CSNlSl, CSN2, CSN3, LGB, DGATI and SCD genes. A total of 24 polymorphic sites were included in the diagnostic microarray. To reconstruct the correct genotype the combination of the results at different SNP positions must be carefully analysed.