Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary of genetic diversity measures across the 51 populations

From: How do introgression events shape the partitioning of diversity among breeds: a case study in sheep

Breed code He Ho MNA Ae Ar (N ≥ 18) FIS Excess HWE Deficiency HWE Assignement (%) (Bayesian clustering)
AuCa 0.70 0.72 7.81 4.31 6.72 −0.019    91.2
Avra 0.52 0.54 4.57 2.72 4.28 −0.035    100
BaBe 0.71 0.72 7.05 3.98 6.15 −0.012    100
Bare 0.72 0.71 7.43 4.77 - 0.015    -a
BeCh 0.55 0.57 4.91 2.84 4.45 −0.038    97.5
BeIl 0.48 0.50 3.62 2.14 3.40 −0.042    100
BeIn 0.65 0.65 6.19 3.58 5.42 0.001    100
Bize 0.65 0.64 5.81 3.62 5.36 0.024    100
BlMa 0.56 0.56 5.24 2.76 4.53 0.003   1 90.5f
BlMC 0.72 0.73 8.14 4.45 - −0.017    62.5
Boul 0.65 0.65 5.48 3.51 5.02 −0.006    97.5
CaLo 0.62 0.60 5.86 3.30 5.25 0.029    100
Cast 0.71 0.71 6.24 4.38 5.99 0.008    76.9
Char 0.54 0.55 4.62 2.49 4.25 −0.019    100
Cors 0.76 0.75 8.48 5.18 7.72 0.013    77.8
Cote 0.53 0.53 4.29 2.56 3.93 −0.016   1 100
DoDo 0.67 0.63 6.10 3.71 5.99 0.060    60
EsLM 0.71 0.73 6.95 4.20 6.14 −0.024    95
Griv 0.71 0.71 7.76 4.23 6.63 0.003    100
Hamp 0.67 0.66 6.05 3.59 5.55 0.016    94.9e
IlFr 0.66 0.66 5.52 3.60 5.10 −0.006    100
LaBr 0.55 0.49 4.71 2.43 4.26 0.117**   1 96.7b
LaLC 0.69 0.68 7.00 3.90 6.02 0.020    50
LaLO 0.67 0.69 6.71 3.66 5.82 −0.031    77.5
LaVG 0.69 0.69 6.67 3.87 5.75 −0.001    92.5
LaVO 0.71 0.72 7.91 4.25 6.79 −0.021    65
Land 0.68 0.69 5.57 3.44 5.10 −0.014    93.1
Limo 0.72 0.72 7.33 4.45 6.44 −0.014   1 91.2
Lour 0.71 0.74 7.24 4.48 6.48 −0.039    76.5
MaTN 0.71 0.71 6.91 4.31 6.23 0.004 1   100
MaTR 0.72 0.69 6.86 3.94 6.04 0.027    85
MeAr 0.74 0.75 8.10 4.38 6.90 −0.011    80
MeRa 0.50 0.50 3.05 2.32 2.96 0.005    100
MoCh 0.66 0.64 6.67 3.55 5.75 0.028    97.5c
MoNo 0.70 0.71 7.24 3.72 6.11 −0.010   1 78.4b
Mour 0.70 0.70 7.67 3.97 6.54 −0.004    74.3b
MoVe 0.61 0.60 6.33 3.14 5.49 0.010    100
NoVe 0.72 0.70 8.19 4.67 7.05 0.044    84.4
PrSu 0.71 0.68 7.81 4.13 6.61 0.034    90
Rava 0.69 0.72 6.95 3.89 6.15 −0.058*    89.7
RoHa 0.58 0.58 5.71 2.72 4.76 −0.010    98.2
Roma 0.70 0.71 6.95 3.98 6.21 −0.002    100d
RoOu 0.61 0.60 6.38 3.20 5.35 0.018    95.7f
Roov 0.61 0.61 4.33 3.01 - 0.005    100d
RoRo 0.72 0.76 7.71 4.35 6.89 −0.055    86.7
Solo 0.60 0.60 4.62 2.91 4.20 −0.012    100
Sout 0.57 0.59 4.38 2.66 4.30 −0.030    100c
Suff 0.61 0.59 5.14 3.13 4.55 0.027    100e
Tara 0.71 0.70 8.05 4.02 7.04 0.016    46.9
Texe 0.65 0.66 5.62 3.14 4.86 −0.012    100
ThMa 0.69 0.68 7.10 4.18 6.06 0.014    97.4
  1. He = non-biased expected heterozygosity; Ho = observed heterozygosity; MNA = mean number of alleles per locus; Ae = effective number of alleles per locus; Ar (N  18) = allelic richness computed for populations with more than 18 individuals genotyped for each locus; F IS * = significant value after sequential Bonferroni correction (test significance: * P < 0.05. ** P < 0.01); Deficiency HWE/Excess HWE = number of Loci in Heterozygote Deficiency/Excess, after sequential Bonferroni correction; anever more than two individuals clustered together; bthe breed is associated with two different private clusters (see text); c,d,e,fresults are provided considering the cluster shared by the two breeds for K = 51; these two breeds were however clearly segregated when analyzed separately (see text)