Using genomic tools to maintain diversity and fitness in conservation programmes.

Conservation programmes aim at maximizing the survival probability of populations, by minimizing the loss of genetic diversity, which allows populations to adapt to changes, and controlling inbreeding increases. The best known strategy to achieve these goals is optimizing the contributions of the parents to minimize global coancestry in their offspring. Results on neutral scenarios showed that management based on molecular coancestry could maintain more diversity than management based on genealogical coancestry when a large number of markers were available. However, if the population has deleterious mutations, managing using optimal contributions can lead to a decrease in fitness, especially using molecular coancestry, because both beneficial and harmful alleles are maintained, compromising the long-term viability of the population. We introduce here two strategies to avoid this problem: The first one uses molecular coancestry calculated removing markers with low minor allele frequencies, as they could be linked to selected loci. The second one uses a coancestry based on segments of identity by descent, which measures the proportion of genome segments shared by two individuals because of a common ancestor. We compare these strategies under two contrasting mutational models of fitness effects, one assuming many mutations of small effect and another with few mutations of large effect. Using markers at intermediate frequencies maintains a larger fitness than using all markers, but leads to maintaining less diversity. Using the segment-based coancestry provides a compromise solution between maintaining diversity and fitness, especially when the population has some inbreeding load.

Maintaining genetic diversity using molecular coancestry: the effect of marker density and effective population size.

BACKGROUND: The most efficient method to maintain genetic diversity in populations under conservation programmes is to optimize, for each potential parent, the number of offspring left to the next generation by minimizing the global coancestry. Coancestry is usually calculated from genealogical data but molecular markers can be used to replace genealogical coancestry with molecular coancestry. Recent studies showed that optimizing contributions based on coancestry calculated from a large number of SNP markers can maintain higher levels of diversity than optimizing contributions based on genealogical data. In this study, we investigated how SNP density and effective population size impact the use of molecular coancestry to maintain diversity. RESULTS: At low SNP densities, the genetic diversity maintained using genealogical coancestry for optimization was higher than that maintained using molecular coancestry. The performance of molecular coancestry improved with increasing marker density, and, for the scenarios evaluated, it was as efficient as genealogical coancestry if SNP density reached at least 3 times the effective population size.However, increasing SNP density resulted in reduced returns in terms of maintained diversity. While a benefit of 12% was achieved when marker density increased from 10 to 100 SNP/Morgan, the benefit was only 2% when it increased from 100 to 500 SNP/Morgan. CONCLUSIONS: The marker density of most SNP chips already available for farm animals is sufficient for molecular coancestry to outperform genealogical coancestry in conservation programmes aimed at maintaining genetic diversity. For the purpose of effectively maintaining genetic diversity, a marker density of around 500 SNPs/Morgan can be considered as the most cost effective density when developing SNP chips for new species. Since the costs to develop SNP chips are decreasing, chips with 500 SNPs/Morgan should become available in a short-term horizon for non domestic species.

Artificial selection with traditional or genomic relationships: consequences in coancestry and genetic diversity.

Estimated breeding values (EBVs) are traditionally obtained from pedigree information. However, EBVs from high-density genotypes can have higher accuracy than EBVs from pedigree information. At the same time, it has been shown that EBVs from genomic data lead to lower increases in inbreeding compared with traditional selection based on genealogies. Here we evaluate the performance with BLUP selection based on genealogical coancestry with three different genome-based coancestry estimates: (1) an estimate based on shared segments of homozygosity, (2) an approach based on SNP-by-SNP count corrected by allelic frequencies, and (3) the identity by state methodology. We evaluate the effect of different population sizes, different number of genomic markers, and several heritability values for a quantitative trait. The performance of the different measures of coancestry in BLUP is evaluated in the true breeding values after truncation selection and also in terms of coancestry and diversity maintained. Accordingly, cross-performances were also carried out, that is, how prediction based on genealogical records impacts the three other measures of coancestry and inbreeding, and viceversa. Our results show that the genetic gains are very similar for all four coancestries, but the genomic-based methods are superior to using genealogical coancestries in terms of maintaining diversity measured as observed heterozygosity. Furthermore, the measure of coancestry based on shared segments of the genome seems to provide slightly better results on some scenarios, and the increase in inbreeding and loss in diversity is only slightly larger than the other genomic selection methods in those scenarios. Our results shed light on genomic selection vs. traditional genealogical-based BLUP and make the case to manage the population variability using genomic information to preserve the future success of selection programmes.

The evolution of strong reproductive isolation.

Felsenstein distinguished two ways by which selection can directly strengthen isolation. First, a modifier that strengthens prezygotic isolation can be favored everywhere. This fits with the traditional view of reinforcement as an adaptation to reduce deleterious hybridization by strengthening assortative mating. Second, selection can favor association between different incompatibilities, despite recombination. We generalize this "two allele" model to follow associations among any number of incompatibilities, which may include both assortment and hybrid inviability. Our key argument is that this process, of coupling between incompatibilities, may be quite different from the usual view of reinforcement: strong isolation can evolve through the coupling of any kind of incompatibility, whether prezygotic or postzygotic. Single locus incompatibilities become coupled because associations between them increase the variance in compatibility, which in turn increases mean fitness if there is positive epistasis. Multiple incompatibilities, each maintained by epistasis, can become coupled in the same way. In contrast, a single-locus incompatibility can become coupled with loci that reduce the viability of haploid hybrids because this reduces harmful recombination. We obtain simple approximations for the limits of tight linkage, and strong assortment, and show how assortment alleles can invade through associations with other components of reproductive isolation.