Search

A phenotypically interesting strain of cattle existed on the small island of Agersoe, on the west coast of Zealand, Denmark, in the beginning of the last decade. The cattle share a great resemblance to the extinct Danish breed, the Island cattle. The objective of this study was to genetically characterize the Agersoe cattle, using microsatellites, amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) and mtDNA markers, and analyse the genetic variability within the breed and the genetic relationship to 14 European breeds with focus on the Red Danish and Jutland breed. The results show diversity in nuclear markers comparable to that of modern breeds and that the Agersoe cattle are separable from the two native breeds. The absence of inbreeding and the degree of genetic diversity are taken as a sign of recent admixture. The Agersoe cattle did not exhibit a consistent association with any of the European breeds. Several arguments based on this survey have been put forward in favour of characterizing the Agersoe cattle as being the last remnants of the Danish Island Cattle

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.