Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32565685›Full record

ArticleSaudi journal of biological sciences2020

Identification of a new Indian camel germplasm by microsatellite markers based genetic diversity and population structure of three camel populations.

Rekha Sharma, Sonika Ahlawat, Himani Sharma, Ved Prakash, Shilpa, Sunita Khatak, R K Sawal, M S Tantia

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi journal of biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rekha SharmaICAR-National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources, Karnal 132001, India.
Sonika AhlawatICAR-National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources, Karnal 132001, India.
Himani SharmaICAR-National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources, Karnal 132001, India.
Ved PrakashNational Research Centre on Camels, Bikaner, Bikaner 334022, India.
ShilpaUniversity Institute of Engineering and Technology, Kurukshetra 136119, India.
Sunita KhatakUniversity Institute of Engineering and Technology, Kurukshetra 136119, India.
R K SawalNational Research Centre on Camels, Bikaner, Bikaner 334022, India.
M S TantiaICAR-National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources, Karnal 132001, India.
National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources · INNational Research Centre on Camel · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Camel invokes fascinating chapter of Indian desert history and is integral component of its ecosystem. Camel population has reached a crisis point after three decades of decline (75%) causing major concern to the policy makers. >28% of Indian camel is not yet characterized. It is imperative to describe country's camel germplasm and its existing diversity for designing conservation plan. One such population is Sindhi, distributed along border with Pakistan. Twenty five microsatellite markers being valuable tool for estimating genetic diversity were selected to elucidate genetic variability and relationship of Sindhi with two registered camel breeds of India- Marwari and Kharai. The standard metrics of genomic diversity detected moderate variability in all the three populations. A total of 303 alleles with a mean of 8.116 ± 0.587 alleles per locus were found in total of 143 animals. Sindhi population had intermediate allelic diversity with 8.522 ± 1.063 alleles per locus. Corresponding values in Marwari and Kharai were 8.783 ± 0.962 and 7.043 ± 1.030, respectively. Genetic variability within the breeds was moderate as evidenced by the mean observed heterozygosity of 0.556 ± 0.025. Sindhi camel population harbors higher genetic variability (Ho = 0.594) as compared to the two registered camel breeds (Marwari, 0.543 and Kharai, 0.531). Mean expected heterozygosity under Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium was higher than the observed values across the three camel groups, indicating deviations from assumptions of this model. In fact, average positive F value of 0.084 to 0.206 reflected heterozygote deficiency in these populations. These Indian camel populations have not experienced serious demographic bottlenecks in the recent past. Differences among populations were medium and accounted for 7.3% of total genetic variability. Distinctness of three camel populations was supported by all the approaches utilized to study genetic relationships such as genetic distances, phylogenetic relationship, correspondence analysis, clustering method based on Bayesian approach and individual assignment. Sindhi camel population was clearly separated from two registered breeds of Indian camel. Results conclude Sindhi to be a separate genepool. Moderate genetic diversity provides an optimistic viewpoint for the survival of severely declining indigenous camel populations with appropriate planning strategies for conserving the existing genetic variation and to avoid any escalation of inbreeding.

Indexed as

BottleneckGenetic diversityIndian camelMicrosatellite markerPopulation differentiation

Identifiers

PMID32565685
PMCPMC7296511
OpenAlexW3023039679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.