Genetic linkage map of a wild genome: genomic structure, recombination and sexual dimorphism in bighorn sheep.

Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 100965258 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1471-2164 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14712164 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMC Genomics Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2000-

Chromosome Mapping* ; Genetic Linkage* ; Recombination, Genetic* ; Sex Characteristics*; Genome/*genetics ; Sheep, Bighorn/*genetics; Animals ; Centromere/genetics ; Female ; Genetic Markers ; Genotype ; Male ; Pedigree ; Polymorphism, Genetic ; Population Dynamics ; Sheep, Domestic/genetics ; Telomere/genetics

Background: The construction of genetic linkage maps in free-living populations is a promising tool for the study of evolution. However, such maps are rare because it is difficult to develop both wild pedigrees and corresponding sets of molecular markers that are sufficiently large. We took advantage of two long-term field studies of pedigreed individuals and genomic resources originally developed for domestic sheep (Ovis aries) to construct a linkage map for bighorn sheep, Ovis canadensis. We then assessed variability in genomic structure and recombination rates between bighorn sheep populations and sheep species.
Results: Bighorn sheep population-specific maps differed slightly in contiguity but were otherwise very similar in terms of genomic structure and recombination rates. The joint analysis of the two pedigrees resulted in a highly contiguous map composed of 247 microsatellite markers distributed along all 26 autosomes and the X chromosome. The map is estimated to cover about 84% of the bighorn sheep genome and contains 240 unique positions spanning a sex-averaged distance of 3051 cM with an average inter-marker distance of 14.3 cM. Marker synteny, order, sex-averaged interval lengths and sex-averaged total map lengths were all very similar between sheep species. However, in contrast to domestic sheep, but consistent with the usual pattern for a placental mammal, recombination rates in bighorn sheep were significantly greater in females than in males (~12% difference), resulting in an autosomal female map of 3166 cM and an autosomal male map of 2831 cM. Despite differing genome-wide patterns of heterochiasmy between the sheep species, sexual dimorphism in recombination rates was correlated between orthologous intervals.
Conclusions: We have developed a first-generation bighorn sheep linkage map that will facilitate future studies of the genetic architecture of trait variation in this species. While domestication has been hypothesized to be responsible for the elevated mean recombination rate observed in domestic sheep, our results suggest that it is a characteristic of Ovis species. However, domestication may have played a role in altering patterns of heterochiasmy. Finally, we found that interval-specific patterns of sexual dimorphism were preserved among closely related Ovis species, possibly due to the conserved position of these intervals relative to the centromeres and telomeres. This study exemplifies how transferring genomic resources from domesticated species to close wild relative can benefit evolutionary ecologists while providing insights into the evolution of genomic structure and recombination rates of domesticated species.

Genome Res. 2007 Nov;17(11):1675-89. (PMID: 17975172)
J Evol Biol. 2009 Aug;22(8):1599-607. (PMID: 19555442)
Int J Parasitol. 2007 Jan;37(1):121-9. (PMID: 17067607)
BMC Genomics. 2009 Jul 29;10:339. (PMID: 19640266)
Mol Ecol Resour. 2009 Jul;9(4):1121-6. (PMID: 21564850)
Nature. 2003 Dec 11;426(6967):655-8. (PMID: 14668862)
Mol Ecol. 2005 Feb;14(2):363-79. (PMID: 15660931)
Genome Res. 2001 Jul;11(7):1275-89. (PMID: 11435411)
J Hered. 2006 Jan-Feb;97(1):21-30. (PMID: 16267166)
PLoS Biol. 2005 Mar;3(3):e63. (PMID: 15736976)
Evolution. 2007 Jun;61(6):1403-16. (PMID: 17542849)
Evolution. 2010 Jan;64(1):97-107. (PMID: 19659596)
Nat Genet. 2005 Apr;37(4):429-34. (PMID: 15723063)
Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Jun 22;273(1593):1491-9. (PMID: 16777743)
Biol Lett. 2008 Apr 23;4(2):228-31. (PMID: 18270161)
Mamm Genome. 2006 Apr;17(4):346-53. (PMID: 16596456)
Genome Res. 2004 Oct;14(10A):1987-98. (PMID: 15466297)
Heredity (Edinb). 2010 Feb;104(2):196-205. (PMID: 19690581)
Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Sep;63(3):861-9. (PMID: 9718341)
Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Mar 7;274(1610):619-26. (PMID: 17254985)
Anim Genet. 1989;20(2):179-86. (PMID: 2757269)
Genetics. 2002 Feb;160(2):649-57. (PMID: 11861568)
Mamm Genome. 1995 Oct;6(10):714-24. (PMID: 8563170)
Heredity (Edinb). 2008 Feb;100(2):158-70. (PMID: 17314923)
Genetics. 2006 Jul;173(3):1521-37. (PMID: 16868121)
Nat Rev Genet. 2007 Jan;8(1):23-34. (PMID: 17146469)
Proc Biol Sci. 2008 Mar 22;275(1635):623-8. (PMID: 18211870)
Am Nat. 2004 Jan;163(1):105-12. (PMID: 14767840)
Biol Lett. 2006 Sep 22;2(3):435-8. (PMID: 17148424)
Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2004;5:317-49. (PMID: 15485352)
J Evol Biol. 2007 Jul;20(4):1415-27. (PMID: 17584236)
PLoS Genet. 2008 Jul 11;4(7):e1000119. (PMID: 18617997)
Science. 2005 Apr 1;308(5718):107-11. (PMID: 15705809)
Mol Ecol. 2008 Jan;17(1):221-35. (PMID: 18173501)
Genetics. 2009 Aug;182(4):1335-44. (PMID: 19535546)
Science. 2008 Jan 18;319(5861):318-20. (PMID: 18202287)
Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Jul;63(1):259-66. (PMID: 9634505)
Nature. 1987 Apr 23-29;326(6115):803-5. (PMID: 3574451)
Growth Dev Aging. 1992 Winter;56(4):269-81. (PMID: 1487365)
Trends Genet. 2010 Jun;26(6):275-84. (PMID: 20444518)
Anim Genet. 1995 Apr;26(2):130-1. (PMID: 7733504)
Proc Biol Sci. 2008 Mar 22;275(1635):695-702. (PMID: 18211883)
Evolution. 2008 Feb;62(2):276-94. (PMID: 18067567)
Mol Ecol Resour. 2011 Mar;11(2):314-22. (PMID: 21429138)
Genetics. 2002 Dec;162(4):1863-73. (PMID: 12524355)
Genetics. 2009 Aug;182(4):1345-9. (PMID: 19535547)
Mol Ecol. 1998 May;7(5):639-55. (PMID: 9633105)

0 (Genetic Markers)

Date Created: 20101006 Date Completed: 20101227 Latest Revision: 20211020

20221213

PMC3091677

10.1186/1471-2164-11-524

20920197