Next Article in Journal
The Welfare of Horses Competing in Three-Barrel Race Events Is Shown to Be Not Inhibited by Short Intervals between Starts
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of the Anti-Inflammatory and Antioxidant Potential of Cymbopogon citratus Essential Oil in Zebrafish
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 14
Issue 4
10.3390/ani14040582
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Demography and Genealogical Analysis of Massese Sheep, a Native Breed of Tuscany

by
Lorella Giuliotti
1,*,
Maria Novella Benvenuti
1,
Giovanna Preziuso
1,
Emilia Ventura
2,
Pancrazio Fresi
3 and
Francesca Cecchi
1
1
Department of Veterinary Science, Università di Pisa, Viale delle Piagge 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
2
Veterinarian Free lance, Via dell’alberaccio 15, 56017 San Giuliano Terme, Italy
3
Asso.Na.Pa (Associazione Nazionale della Pastorizia), Via XXIV Maggio 44, 00187 Roma, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2024, 14(4), 582; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14040582
Submission received: 13 December 2023 / Revised: 5 February 2024 / Accepted: 6 February 2024 / Published: 9 February 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Animal Genetics and Genomics)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Sheep farming is crucial for preserving biodiversity, maintaining soil and water quality, and supporting local communities. Preserving genetic resources is vital for combating new diseases and tackling environmental changes. This study focuses on the Massese sheep, an indigenous breed which is primarily bred in Tuscany in extensive conditions using natural resources. The examination of their genealogy revealed that the data were incomplete, as a significant number of animals were recorded with one or two parents whose identity was unknown. This made it difficult to accurately evaluate the relationships among animals and to determine the extent of inbreeding. Breeders’ associations can play a crucial role in preserving genetic diversity; however, the completeness of the genealogical data needs improving.

Abstract

This study investigates the genealogical and demographic trends of the Massese sheep breed in Tuscany from 2001 to 2021. The Herd Book kept by the Italian Sheep and Goat Breeders Association (Asso.Na.Pa) provided the data. The descriptive statistics were analyzed using JMP software. The pedigree parameters of a total of 311,056 animals (whole population—WP) were analyzed using CFC, ENDOG, and Pedigree viewer software. A total of 24,586 animals born in the period 2007–2021 represented the Reference Population (RP), and 18,554 animals the Base Population (BP). The demographic results showed an inconsistent trend of offspring registration. This study showed a short period of productivity for both ewes and rams, with means of 1.47 and 19.2 registered newborn ewes and rams, respectively. The genealogical analysis revealed incomplete data, highlighting inaccurate assessments of the relationships among the animals, and inbreeding with large differences among provinces. The average inbreeding coefficient in the WP was 1.16%, and it was 2.26% in the RP. The total number of inbreds was 2790 in the WP, with an average FPED of 13.56%, and 2713 in the RP, with an average FPED of 12.82%. The use of pedigree data is a key and economical approach to calculating inbreeding and relationship coefficients. It is the primary step in genetic management, playing a crucial role in the preservation of a breed. The regular updating of genealogical data is the first step to ensuring the conservation of animal genetic resources, and this study is compromised by the lack of such updates.

1. Introduction

Sheep originated in Southwest Asia from wild Asian mouflon, and then, migrated across Eurasia and Africa, settling down in different climatic conditions, which is why they show great variability in their resilience [1]. Local breeds acquired fundamental traits such as adaptability and frugality. Their conservation represents an important tool for tackling critical environmental events. In this regard, Massese sheep adapt to temperature changes by modifying their respiratory frequency and heart rate [2].
Animal genetic resources provide a crucial opportunity for the sustainable development of the livestock sector, whether in terms of increasing the food supply, mitigating and adapting to climate change, or promoting a broad range of ecosystem services [3].
The world’s animal genetic resources are continuing to erode because of the rapid changes affecting livestock production systems. The FAO states that the expansion of markets and economic globalization accelerate the loss of breeds and stimulate a tendency to concentrate on a few specific breeds [4]. Local breeds offer the opportunity to make use of marginal areas, preserve the environment, guarantee an income for inhabitants, and offer niche food products [5]. In fact, the preservation of native breeds is also crucial for the heritage of traditional products and practices that constitute typical products [6].
Genetics is of primary importance for both safeguarding and enhancing livestock, as it has a direct influence on health and productivity.
The Massese sheep is one of the thirteen autochthonous Italian breeds registered in the Herd Book kept by the Italian Sheep and Goat Breeders Association (Asso.Na.Pa). Not all Massese breed farms are registered in the Herd Book, and those that are registered breed purebred animals. The Tuscany Region promotes the breeding of native Tuscan breeds through incentives for their preservation [7].
Data updated in June 2023 from the Italian National Data Base (BDN), related to both selected and not-selected animals, report 23,885 heads, of which 16,263 were reared in Tuscany. Massese sheep are also diffuse in other regions, especially in Emilia Romagna, Lazio, and Marche [8].
The primary use of Massese sheep is for milk, but lamb meat is also appreciated by consumers [2]. The Massese breed has an open brown colored fleece due to the presence of two coat color types (black and grey) mainly derived by combining the ASIP and MC1R mutations [9,10,11]. These genes control coat color variations in sheep, which is a trait of great importance in farm animals in terms of identification and attribution, which are valuable in genetic improvement and selective breeding programs [9,12].
The face is typically black, and both rams and ewes have horns which in males, are spiral shaped, and in females, are thinner [13].
Mature rams and ewes are around 85 and 77 cm in height, respectively. The live body weight of rams is around 90 kg, and of mature ewes, around 65 kg.
The Massese sheep’s head is light and proportionate, with a straight profile in females and a convex one in males. The eyes are lively and rather prominent, the ears are medium-sized and thin, and the muzzle is wide. The head is not woolly, and the neck is rather elongated and thin, light, and with little fleece. The chest is wide, and the back-lumbar line is long and straight. The female has a well attached breast under the belly, with little connective and adipose tissue, with an evident venous network and very fine and elastic skin [14] (Figure 1).
The puberty of Massese ewes occurs at 6–8 months and the first lamb at about 15–18 months. The good fertility of the breed and its typical reproductive pattern enables three lambings over a 2-year period [15].
The milk production of the Massese breed is 200–300 kg per lactation [16].
The meat production of the Massese breed consists of three types of lamb slaughtered in early autumn, late autumn, and late spring [17]. Lambs are often slaughtered after a suckling period of 30 days [18] and with a live weight of between 11 and 14 kg [19].
Knowledge of genetic variability is essential to preserve and improve biodiversity. The first step in any biodiversity preservation program and in genetic improvement strategies is to understand the demographic and genealogical structure. Despite the widespread use of modern molecular analysis, the genetic variability of a population is still evaluated through pedigree analysis in both livestock [20,21,22] and pets [23,24,25].
The demographic trend of Massese sheep was recently analyzed by Giuliotti et al. (2023) [26], highlighting a dramatic decline in the number of heads enrolled in the Herd Book and a lack of complete genealogical data.
The aim of this study was to examine the consistence of Massese sheep included in the Herd Book in the ten provinces in Tuscany in the last twenty years. Moreover, the genealogical variability in the breed was inspected.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Collection

This study analyzed the genealogical information of Massese sheep reared in Tuscany (Italy) from 2001 to 2021; data were provided by Asso.Na.Pa. and concerned ten provinces: Arezzo (Ar), Florence (Fi) (which included the data of the province of Prato), Grosseto (Gr), Livorno (Li), Lucca (Lu), Massa Carrara (MC), Pisa (Pi), Pistoia (Pt), and Siena (Si). The study did not consider the animals of the Asso.Na.Pa. nucleus of the Massese breed located in Asciano (Si) due to the specific management practices used.
The complete genealogical sampling represented the Whole Population (WP), comprising all founders, ancestors, and their offspring, while the Reference Population (RP) referred to 2007–2021 data. The Base Population (BP) represented animals with one or two unknown parents (absolute founders = ft).

2.2. Statistical Analysis

Descriptive analysis was performed with JMP software version 5.0 [27]. Longevity was calculated in the animals for which the date of elimination was available. The trend in the number of newborns during the experimental period was determined, along with the number of registered offspring/rams and the number of registered offspring/ewes.
Pedigree Viewer software v.6.3 was used for the genealogical data [28] to detect errors in the data files and to show the full pedigree structure in the WP and in the ten provinces. The other analyses were carried out with ENDOG v. 4.8 [29] and with CFC v.1.0 [30]. The following parameters were computed:
-
The pedigree completeness. This provides information on the completeness of the pedigree in each generation as well as the number of missing parental records. The percentage completeness of the pedigree was computed. This was also assessed by calculating the mean maximum number of generations, the mean complete number, and the number of equivalent completed generations [29]. ENDOG includes information on the completeness of each ancestor in the pedigree to the 5th parental generation. The number of discrete generation equivalents was determined because it is considered another way to describe pedigree information [31].
-
The number of inbred animals, the average inbreeding coefficient (FPED), and the average numerator relationship coefficient (ANR) in the WP and RP and per province. The data were filtered, and animals with missing information were excluded from the calculation of population statistics, specifically the average inbreeding (FPED) and the average numerator relationship coefficient (ANR). The software CFC [30] computes the ANR using the indirect method proposed by Colleau (2002) [32], and FPED using Colleau’s modified algorithm [33]. FPED is the probability that at any randomly drawn locus, a given individual has two identical alleles by descent [34], which was calculated by the tabular method described by Meuwissen and Luo (1992) [35]. The FPED coefficient, number of inbred animals, and average inbreeding coefficient for each traced generation was calculated using ENDOG software. The distribution of the inbreeding level in the whole population was analyzed, and nine different class levels of inbreeding were considered: 0 < F ≤ 0.05; 0.05 < F ≤ 0.10; 0.10 < F ≤ 0.15; 0.15 < F ≤ 0.20; 0.20 < F ≤ 0.25; 0.25 < F ≤ 0.30; 0.30 < F ≤ 0.35; and 0.35 < F ≤ 0.40 [30].
-
The rate of inbreeding (ΔF) was considered to follow the variation in inbreeding over time, and was expressed per unit of time (generations, years) [32]. In the current study, the rate of inbreeding was calculated per generation using the classical formula ΔF = (Ft − Ft−1)/(1 − Ft−1), where Ft and Ft−1 are the average inbreeding in the (th) generation. Individuals that were present in more than one generation were included in all those generations in which they were present.
-
The effective population size (Ne) was calculated using ΔF as Ne = 1/(2ΔF). Small populations with shallow pedigrees, irrespectively of how Ne is computed, do not fit real populations well, thus leading to an overestimation of the real size of the population. To better characterize this, ENDOG gives three additional values of Ne by computing the regression coefficient (b) of the individual FPED over (i) the number of full generations traced; (ii) the maximum number of generations traced; and (iii) the number of equivalent complete generations, and considering the corresponding regression coefficient as the increase in FPED between two generations, and consequently, Ne = 1/(2b). The number of ancestors and the effective number of ancestors (fa) were also computed [32].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Demographic Data

The complete database comprised 31,156 animals (1328 males and 29,828 females) distributed throughout the whole of Tuscany.
The province with the highest number of animals enrolled in the Herd Book during the analyzed period was Lucca, followed by Pisa. On the other hand, Arezzo and Florence had the lowest number of animals (Figure 2). These last two provinces are a long way from the native area of Massese sheep and rear other breeds such as Sarda [8].
Figure 3 shows the trend of registered lambs. After an initial period of relative stability with a consistent range of between 400–600 heads, there was a notable increase in the period from 2008 to 2012, peaking at 2258 in 2012. Subsequently, there was a decline, reaching only 403 registered newborns by 2021.
This particular trend was previously observed by our research group [26] in the province of Pisa and can be explained by several factors. These include the crisis due to generational changes, the increase in predator populations [13], difficulties in adapting to health and hygiene regulations that were economically challenging, and the lack of necessary infrastructure [36]. Other contributing factors are attributed to the introduction of foreign breeds such as Lacaune [8] and changes in the legislative decree regarding animal reproduction, which may have resulted in difficulties in updating the database [26].
In this context, breeder associations could play a pivotal role in conserving, developing, and promoting local breeds. Apart from maintaining updated records in Herd Books, these associations store information regarding the characteristics of the breed and its products. Consequently, they can facilitate the marketing of specific products [37], such as “Pecorino Toscano”, a semi-hard Italian sheep cheese with a Protected Denomination of Origin (P.D.O.) [38]. To further expand Massese sheep farming, government funds [30] help breeders overcome the challenges encountered. The sheep dairy sector currently represents 3% of Italy’s agricultural sector and has the potential to increase its exports of typical dairy products, particularly with P.D.O. [39].
Figure 4 shows the registered number of offspring per ewe in the provinces. The overall results were consistent across all the provinces, with an average of registered offspring per ewe equal to 1.47 ± 0.83, and with 6195 ewes (68%) giving birth only once. Only two ewes were recorded to have eight deliveries. This could be attributed to difficulties in registering newborns, rather than indicating the short length of the ewes’ reproductive career. These findings do not align with typical sheep management practices, which generally involve four to five lactations [40].
The average longevity of the rams, calculated from 335 available data on males, was 8.5 ± 4.16 years, with large differences among provinces, ranging from 2.4 years in the province of Grosseto to 13.1 years in the province of Lucca (Table 1). The average longevity of the ewes (n = 12,951) was 7.9 ± 4.20 years, with values ranging from 5.0 years in the province of Florence to a maximum of 10.7 years in the province of Massa Carrara (Table 1). Generally, within a single flock, rams tend to remain in production for a shorter duration than females to prevent excessive inbreeding. Rams are thus often transferred from one farm to another, and a larger number of registered offspring per ram would therefore facilitate a more accurate evaluation of their genetic value.
The average number of lambs registered per ram was 19.2 ± 28.38, with only one instance reaching 230 offspring. Figure 5 shows the mean registered offspring per ram in the provinces of Tuscany excluding the province of Arezzo, which registered only one ram. The represented data suggest the underutilization of rams, with a potentially negative impact in terms of genetic value assessment, as noted in our previous investigation conducted in the province of Pisa [26].

3.2. Genealogical Data

Table 2 summarizes the main genealogical parameters calculated from 31,156 records. The BP included 18,554 animals (59.55% of the WP). The number of inbred animals was 2790. Additionally, 1486 groups of full siblings were identified, and the average number of full siblings per family was 2.15 (ranging from 2 to 6).
Out of the total number of 24,856 animals registered in the RP, both parents were known in 10,803 (43.5%), and 2713 animals were found to be inbred.
Figure 6 shows the entire genealogy of the population, divided into 11 traced generations. Figure 7 shows the genealogy of the animals categorized by province, with the highest pedigree depth observed in Massa Carrara (11 traced generations), followed by Lucca (9 traced generations) and Pisa and Livorno (7 traced generations). The province of Arezzo is not represented in the figure, as only one animal had registered parents.
The details of the pedigree quality of the Massese sheep within the WP are outlined in Figure 8, showing a similar level of pedigree completeness in both the dam and sire pathways. The completeness percentage ranged from 48.4% to 51.3% for the parental generation, from 10.1% to 17.3% for the grandparent generation, and from 2.0% to 5.3% for the third generation of great-grandparents. A comparison of these results with those reported in our previous work [26] shows higher completeness for the parental generation, but lower starting from the third generation of great-grandparents. Similar values were found for the parental generation, but were lower starting from the second generation compared to the Morada Nova breed [41], and they were lower in all generations compared to the Bharat Merino sheep [42] and the Marwari sheep [43].
The mean maximum number of generations and the mean number of complete generations were 0.76 and 0.45, respectively. There was an increase in inbreeding equal to 0.53% (Ne = 94.53) and 0.45% (Ne = 111.11) for the two categories, while the number of equivalent completed traced generations was 0.58, leading to an increase in inbreeding equal to 0.77% (Ne = 64.93). The average number of discrete generation equivalents in the WP was 0.83%, with significant variability among the different provinces, ranging from 0.09 for Arezzo (with a maximum of two generations) to 2.12 for Livorno. Massa Carrara and Pistoia also recorded values greater than 1 (1.78 and 1.43, respectively). These values are confirmed by the data reported in Table 3, where it is shown that the percentage of animals with both registered parents was 99.7% in Livorno, 75.8% in Massa Carrara, and 74.2% in Pistoia. The provinces with the lowest values were Grosseto (13.70%), Pisa (18.42%), and Florence (23.08%).
The RP had 19,824 ancestors, of which 4080 accounted for 50% of the genetic variability, while the effective number of ancestors (fa) was 2346. This finding supports the evidence of the underutilization of rams for breeding, as noted in the “Demographic Data” Section. The large number of founders suggests incomplete genealogical data, thus hindering an accurate assessment of relationships among the animals and their levels of inbreeding. Moreover, it does not provide a comprehensive understanding of the specific animals that made significant contributions to the genetic diversity of the RP.
In many foreign breeds, lower numbers of ancestors are reported as compared with our study, such as Mallick et al. (2020) [42] and Gowane et al. (2013) [44] in Gharat Merino sheep, Vatankhah et al. (2019) in Lori-Bakhtiari sheep [45], and Pedrosa et al. (2010) in Santa Ines sheep [46].

3.3. Inbreeding Coefficient

The average inbreeding coefficient among individuals in the WP was 1.16% and the average numerator relationship was 0.10%, while animals of the RP had an average inbreeding coefficient of 2.26% and an average numerator relationship of 0.13%. These results are difficult to compare with those from other studies on different breeds due to variations in the average inbreeding coefficients within populations, influenced by data completeness and pedigree depth. Similar values were observed in Marwari sheep [43], but higher values were reported in Bharat Merino sheep [42,44], Malpura sheep [47], and the Blue du Maine, Charmoise, and Solognote breeds [48].
The ANR coefficient was estimated to be 0.11% and 0.57% for the WP and RP, respectively; Gowane et al. (2013) [44] reported higher levels of ANR for Bharat Merino sheep, while Ghafouri-Kesbi (2010) [49] documented similar findings for Zandi sheep.
Table 3 and Table 4 present statistics related to the WP, detailing the average inbreeding, number of inbred animals, the ANR by province (Table 3), and the number of animals subdivided by range of FPED within each province (Table 4). The provinces of Livorno, Massa Carrara, and Pistoia recorded the highest percentages of inbred animals. However, they exhibited lower average FPED values for inbred individuals compared to provinces with limited pedigree data.
Out of 2790 inbred animals in the WP, 447 (16.02%) had an F value lower than 0.05, but 672 animals (24.09%) showed values higher than 0.20 (Table 4). The average FPED in the inbreds was 13.56% (Fmin = 0.19% and Fmax = 42.97%), with no differences between both inbred males and females (13.05% vs. 13.62%, respectively). In the 2713 inbred animals of the RP population, the average FPED was 12.82% (Fmin = 0.78% and Fmax = 42.97%).
The results by year (Supplementary Table S1) show that the percentage of animals with both parents known was high up to 2003 (approximately 74%), but then, dropped drastically in the period 2007–2011 (from 32% to 25%). Subsequently, registrations of parents increased again, reaching about 65–72% in the last three years, although the lambs registered in the same period were very low.
Understanding ancestry is crucial for devising improved mating strategies for genetic enhancement. Pairing sires with the lowest ANR coefficient with dams is an effective method to manage inbreeding, which, if excessive, can reduce genetic diversity, expose harmful recessive alleles, and cause inbreeding depression, which can all impact productivity, morphology, and especially reproductive fitness in all species [50,51,52,53].
Regrettably, the genealogical data for Massese sheep in Tuscany are significantly lacking, as reported for the province of Pisa [26]. To address these limitations, the only solution is to compute the inbreeding coefficient using genomic data. Various measures, such as runs of homozygosity (FROH), offer valuable insights into inbreeding and can be employed in the absence of complete pedigree data [54].
Genomic data aid in studying inbreeding depression without the need for extensive parentage analysis over multiple generations [55,56,57], as these two inbreeding coefficients are related [42]. While studies demonstrate a slight correlation between genomic and pedigree-based inbreeding values in Massese sheep, other breeds with more complete pedigrees show a stronger correlation between these values [58]. Genealogical data represent the primary information source for assessing genetic variability in livestock populations [59]. However, genomic tools become fundamental when genealogical information is scarce.

4. Conclusions

The findings of this study reveal remarkable fluctuation in the Massese population, with a notable increase in births registered between 2007 and 2012, followed by a more evident decline from 2019 to 2021 due to various factors, including generational changes, an increase in predator populations, difficulties in adapting to health and hygiene regulations, and the introduction of foreign breeds.
The genealogical data were lacking, with numerous animals registered with at least one unknown parent. This made it challenging to accurately assess the relationships among animals and levels of inbreeding. Additionally, the use of breeding males was lower than expected, compromising an accurate assessment of the estimated breeding value.
Finally, this analysis emphasizes the importance of carefully conserving and managing animal genetic resources, especially for indigenous breeds like the Massese. Breeder associations play a crucial role in conserving and promoting these breeds; however, greater efforts are needed to improve the completeness of genealogical data and implement targeted breeding strategies to preserve genetic diversity.
In fact, when pedigrees are thorough and precise, they continue to be a useful tool. When utilized in conjunction with genomic data, they form an invaluable asset for the management of conservation genomics. Taking this into consideration, future studies should be based on molecular markers to complete and be combined with pedigree analysis.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ani14040582/s1, Table S1: Population statistics on average inbreeding in registered animals per year.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.C.; methodology, F.C., L.G. and M.N.B.; software, F.C., M.N.B. and E.V.; formal analysis, F.C. and M.N.B.; resources, P.F.; data curation F.C., L.G., M.N.B. and G.P.; writing—original draft preparation, F.C., M.N.B. and L.G.; writing—review and editing, M.N.B., L.G., G.P., E.V. and P.F.; supervision, F.C.; project administration, F.C.; funding acquisition, F.C., L.G. and G.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Fondi Ateneo 2022–2023, Università di Pisa.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data are contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Wanjala, G.; Bagi, Z.; Jávor, A.; Kusza, S. Impacts of climate change on sheep genetic diversity: A review. Nat. Res. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 10, 240–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ferreira, J.; McManus, C.M.; Silveira, R.M.F.; da Silva, W.S.T.; Guilhermino, M.M.; Asensio, L.A.B.; Bozzi, R.; Façanha, D.A.E. Reference patterns for thermoregulation in Italian Massese ewes. J. Therm. Biol. 2023, 113, 10348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. FAO. The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture. In FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Assessments; Bélanger, J., Pilling, D., Eds.; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2019; Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/CA3129EN/CA3129EN.pdf (accessed on 17 September 2023).
  4. Tisdell, C. Socioeconomic causes of loss of animal genetic diversity: Analysis and assessment. Ecol. Econ. 2003, 45, 365–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ciani, E.; Ciampolini, R.; D’Andrea, M.; Castellana, E.; Cecchi, F.; Incoronato, C.; D’Angelo, F.; Albenzio, M.; Pilla, F.; Matassino, D.; et al. Analysis of genetic variability within and among Italian sheep breeds reveals population stratification and suggests the presence of a phylogeographic gradient. Small Rum. Res. 2013, 112, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Claps, S.; Annicchiarico, G.; Di Napoli, M.A.; Paladino, F.; Giorgio, D.; Sepe, L.; Rossi, R.; Di Trana, A. Native and non-native sheep breed differences in Canestrato Pugliese cheese quality: A resource for a sustainable pastoral system. Czech J. Food Sci. 2016, 34, 332–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Regione Toscana. Sviluppo Rurale Toscana 2023–2027. Available online: www.regione.toscana.it/-/bando-attuativo-dell-intervento-sra-aca14-allevatori-custodi-della-biodiversit%C3%A0-allevamento-di-razze-animali-autoctone-nazionali-a-rischio-di-estinzione/erosione-genetica-bando-annualit%C3%A0-2023 (accessed on 30 January 2024).
  8. Sistema Informatico Veterinario. Available online: https://www.vetinfo.it/j6_statistiche/index.html#/ (accessed on 15 November 2023).
  9. Fontanesi, L.; Beretti, F.; Riggio, V.; Dall’Olio, S.; Calascibetta, D.; Russo, V.; Portolano, B. Sequence characterization of the melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) gene in sheep with different coat colour and identification of the putative e allele at the ovine Extension locus. Small Rumin. Res. 2010, 91, 200–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fontanesi, L.; Beretti, F.; Dall’Olio, S.; Portolano, B.; Matassino, D.; Russo, V. A melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) gene polymorphism is useful for authentication of Massese sheep dairy products. J. Dairy. Res. 2011, 78, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Fontanesi, L.; Dall’Olio, S.; Beretti, F.; Portolano, B.; Russo, V. Coat colours in the Massese sheep breed are associated with mutations in the agouti signalling protein (ASIP) and melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) genes. Animal 2011, 5, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Giantsis, I.A.; Antonopoulou, D.; Dekolis, N.; Zaralis, K.; Avdi, M. Origin, demographics, inbreeding, phylogenetics, and phenogenetics of Karamaniko breed, a major common ancestor of the autochthonous Greek sheep. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2022, 54, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Russo, C.; Cecchi, F.; Accorsi, P.A.; Scampuddu, N.; Benvenuti, M.N.; Giuliotti, L. Investigation on sheep farm characteristics, wolf predation and animal welfare in the Grosseto province (Italy). Atti Soc. Tosc Sci. Nat. Mem. Ser. B 2020, 127, 113–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bigi, D.; Zanon, A. Atlas of Native Breeds. Cattle, Horses, Sheep and Goats, Pigs Reared in Italy; Edagricole-New Business Media: Bologna, Italy, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  15. Todaro, M.; Dattena, M.; Acciaioli, A.; Bonanno, A.; Bruni, G.; Caroprese, M.; Mele, M.; Sevi, A.; Trabalza Marinucci, M. Aseasonal sheep and goat milk production in the Mediterranean area: Physiological and technical insights. Small Rum. Res. 2015, 126, 59–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Pugliese, C.; Acciaioli, A.; Rapaccini, S.; Parisi, G.; Franci, F. Evolution of chemical composition, somatic cell count and renneting properties of the milk of Massese ewes. Small Rum. Res. 1999, 35, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Acciaioli, A.; Giustini, L.; Pianaccioli, L.; Malvezzi, G. Survey of feeding techniques in the sheep farms of Pistoia Apennines and milk quality. Sci. E Tec. Latt.-Casearia 2011, 62, 407–412. [Google Scholar]
  18. Parrini, S.; Sirtori, F.; Acciaioli, A.; Becciolini, V.; Crovetti, A.; Bonelli, A.; Franci, O.; Bozzi, R. Effect of farming system on meat traits of native Massese suckling lamb. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2021, 20, 71–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Serra, A.; Mele, M.; La Comba, F.; Conte, G.; Buccioni, A.; Secchiari, P. Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA) content of meat from three muscles of Massese suckling lambs slaughtered at different weights. Meat Sci. 2009, 81, 396–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Figueredo, J.S.; Cruz, J.F.; Sousa, L.S.; Teixeira Neto, M.R.; Carneiro, P.L.S.; Brito, N.D.; Pinheiro, R.G.S.; Lacerda, K.S.O.; Mottin, V.D. Genetic diversity and population structure estimation of Brazilian Somali sheep from pedigree data. Small Rumin. Res. 2019, 179, 64–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hashemi, M.; Hossein-Zadeh, N.G. Population genetic structure analysis of Shall sheep using pedigree information and effect of inbreeding on growth traits. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2020, 19, 1195–1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bramante, G.; Pieragostini, E.; Ciani, E. Genetic Variability within the Murgese Horse Breed Inferred from Genealogical Data and Morphometric Measurements. Diversity 2022, 14, 422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Cecchi, F.; Paci, G.; Spaterna, A.; Ragatzu, M.; Ciampolini, R. Demographic approach on the study of genetic parameters in the dog Braque Français type Pyrénées Italian population. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 15, 30–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ciampolini, R.; Cecchi, F.; Paci, G.; Policardo, C.; Spaterna, A. Investigation on the Genetic Variability of the American Pit Bull Terrier dogs belonging to an Italian breeder using Microsatellite Markers and genealogical data. Cytol. Genet. 2013, 47, 217–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Michels, P.W.; Distl, O. Genetic Diversity and Trends of Ancestral and New Inbreeding in Deutsch Drahthaar Assessed by Pedigree Data. Animals 2022, 12, 929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Giuliotti, L.; Benvenuti, M.N.; Ventura, E.; Fresi, P.; Preziuso, G.; Cecchi, F. Massese sheep characteristics and demo-genetic trends in the province of Pisa (Italy). Rend. Lincei Sci. Fis. Nat. 2023, 34, 1221–1229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. SAS; JMP. User’s Guide, Version 5.0; SAS Inst.: Cary, NC, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kinghorn, B.P.; Kinghorn, S. Pedigree Viewer-a graphical utility for browsing pedigreed data sets. In Proceedings of the 5th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, 7–12 August 1994; Volume 22, pp. 85–86. [Google Scholar]
  29. Gutiérrez, J.P.; Goyache, F. A note on ENDOG: A computer program for analysing pedigree information. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 2005, 122, 172–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Sargolzaei, M.; Iwaisaki, H.; Colleau, J.J. CFC (Contribution, Inbreeding (F), Coancestry), Release 1.0. A software package for pedigree analysis and monitoring genetic diversity. In Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied on Livestock Production, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 13–18 August 2006. Instituto Prociência Eds. [Google Scholar]
  31. Siderits, M.; Baumung, R.; Fuerst-Waltl, B. Pedigree analysis in the German Paint Horse: Genetic variability and the influence of pedigree quality. Livest. Sci. 2013, 151, 152–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Colleau, J.J. An indirect approach to the extensive calculation of relationship coefficients. Genet. Sel. Evol. 2002, 34, 409–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Sargolzaei, M.; Iwaisaki, H.; Colleau, J.J. A fast algorithm for computing inbreeding coefficients in large populations. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 2005, 122, 325–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Wright, S. Coefficients of inbreeding and relationship. Am. Nat. 1922, 56, 330–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Meuwissen, T.; Luo, Z. Computing inbreeding coefficients in large populations. Genet. Sel. Evol. 1992, 24, 305–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gicquel, E.; Boettcher, P.; Besbes, B.; Furre, S.; Fernández, J.; Danchin-Burge, C.; Berger, B.; Baumung, R.; Feijóo, J.R.J.; Leroy, G. Impact of conservation measures on demography and genetic variability of livestock breeds. Animals 2020, 14, 670–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Papachristoforou, C.; Koumas, A.; Hadjipavlou, G. Adding value to local breeds with particular reference to sheep and goats. Anim. Genet. Res./Res. Génét. Anim./Recur. Genét. Anim. 2013, 53, 157–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Daghio, M.; Pini, F.; Espinoza-Tofalos, A.; Conte, G.; Mari, E.; Giannerini, F.; Giovannetti, L.; Buccioni, A.; Franzetti, A.; Granchi, L.; et al. Characterization of the microbial community in ripened Pecorino Toscano cheese affected by pink discoloration. Food Microbiol. 2022, 104, 104006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. ISMEA. Rete Rurale Nazionale 2014-2020. In La Competitività Della Filiera Ovina in Italia; Ministero Delle Politiche Agricole Alimentari, Forestali e del Turismo: Roma, Italy, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  40. Giannone, M. Gli ovini Da Latte; Edagricole: Bologna, Italy, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  41. McManus, C.; Facó, O.; Shiotsuki, L.; de Paula Rolo, J.L.J.; Peripolli, V. Pedigree analysis of Brazilian Morada Nova hair sheep. Small Rumin. Res. 2019, 170, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Mallick, P.K.; Chauhan, I.; Thirumaran, S.M.K.; Pourouchttamane, R.; Kumar, A. Genetic variability of Bharat merino sheep derived from pedigree information. Indian J. Anim. Res. 2020, 54, 1324–1331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Vyas, J.; Chopra, A.; Pannu, U.; Saran, R.K.; Narula, H.K. Population structure of Marwari sheep through pedigree analysis. Small Rumin. Res. 2022, 206, 106590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Gowane, G.R.; Prakash, V.; Chopra, A.; Prince, L.L.L. Population structure and effect of inbreeding on lamb growth in Bharat Merino sheep. Small Rumin. Res. 2013, 114, 72–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Vatankhah, M.; Sigdel, A.; Abdollahi-Arpanahi, R. Population structure of Lori-Bakhtiari sheep in Iran by pedigree analysis. Small Rumin. Res. 2019, 174, 148–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Pedrosa, V.B.; Santana Jr, M.L.; Oliveira, P.S.; Eler, J.P.; Ferraz, J.B.S. Population structure and inbreeding effects on growth traits of Santa Inês sheep in Brazil. Small Rumin. Res. 2010, 93, 135–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gowane, G.R.; Chopra, A.; Misra, S.S.; Prince, L.L.L. Genetic diversity of a nucleus flock of Malpura sheep through pedigree analyses. Small Rumin. Res. 2014, 120, 35–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Danchin-Burge, C.; Palhiere, I.; François, D.; Bibé, B.; Leroy, G.; Verrier, E. Pedigree analysis of seven small French sheep populations and implications for the management of rare breeds. J. Anim. Sci. 2010, 88, 505–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ghafouri-Kesbi, F. Analysis of genetic diversity in a close population of Zandi sheep using genealogical information. J. Genet. 2010, 89, 479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Cecchi, F.; Carlini, G.; Giuliotti, L.; Russo, C. Inbreeding may affect phenotypic traits in an Italian Population of Basset Hound dog. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Cl. Sci. Fi Mat. Nat. 2018, 29, 165–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Gholizadeh, M.; Ghafouri-Kesbi, F. Inbreeding depression in growth traits of Baluchi sheep. Small Rumin. Res. 2016, 144, 184–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Gonzalez-Recio, O.; Lopez de Maturana, E.; Gutierrez, J.P. Inbreeding depression on female fertility and calving ease in Spanish dairy cattle. J. Dairy. Sci. 2007, 90, 5744–5752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Selvaggi, M.; Dario, C.; Peretti, V.; Ciotola, F.; Carnicella, D.; Dario, M. Inbreeding depression in Leccese sheep. Small Rumin. Res. 2010, 89, 42–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Curik, I.; Ferenčaković, M.; Sölkner, J. Inbreeding and runs of homozygosity: A possible solution to an old problem. Livest. Sci. 2014, 166, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Bjelland, D.W.; Weigel, K.A.; Vukasinovic, N.; Nkrumah, J.D. Evaluation of inbreeding depression in Holstein cattle using whole-genome SNP markers and alternative measures of genomic inbreeding. J. Dairy Sci. 2013, 96, 4697–4706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Howard, J.T.; Pryce, J.E.; Baes, C.; Maltecca, C. Invited review: Inbreeding in the genomics era: Inbreeding, inbreeding depression, and management of genomic variability. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 6009–6024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Saura, M.; Fernández, A.; Varona, L.; Fernández, A.I.; de Cara, M.A.R.; Barragán, C.; Villanueva, B. Detecting inbreeding depression for reproductive traits in Iberian pigs using genome-wide data. Genet. Sel. Evol. 2015, 47, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Cortellari, M.; Negro, A.; Bionda, A.; Grande, S.; Cesarani, A.; Carta, A.; Macciotta, N.; Biffani, S.; Crepaldi, P. Using Pedigree and Genomic Data toward Better Management of Inbreeding in Italian Dairy Sheep and Goat Breeds. Animals 2022, 12, 2828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Kasap, A.; Ramljak, J.; Špehar, M. Estimation of Population-Specific Genetic Parameters Important for Long-Term Optimum Contribution Selection-Case Study on a Dairy Istrian Sheep Breed. Animals 2021, 11, 2356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Animals 14 00582 g001
Figure 1. A flock of Massese sheep.
Figure 1. A flock of Massese sheep.
Animals 14 00582 g001
Animals 14 00582 g002
Figure 2. Animal distribution in Tuscany.
Figure 2. Animal distribution in Tuscany.
Animals 14 00582 g002
Animals 14 00582 g003
Figure 3. Distribution of registered lambs per year.
Figure 3. Distribution of registered lambs per year.
Animals 14 00582 g003
Animals 14 00582 g004
Figure 4. Registered offspring per ewe in Tuscany.
Figure 4. Registered offspring per ewe in Tuscany.
Animals 14 00582 g004
Animals 14 00582 g005
Figure 5. Registered offspring per ram in Tuscany.
Figure 5. Registered offspring per ram in Tuscany.
Animals 14 00582 g005
Animals 14 00582 g006
Figure 6. Graphic representation of the whole genealogy (sires are indicated with blue lines and dams with red lines).
Figure 6. Graphic representation of the whole genealogy (sires are indicated with blue lines and dams with red lines).
Animals 14 00582 g006
Animals 14 00582 g007
Figure 7. Graphic representation of genealogy (sires are indicated with blue lines and dams with red lines) for provinces.
Figure 7. Graphic representation of genealogy (sires are indicated with blue lines and dams with red lines) for provinces.
Animals 14 00582 g007
Animals 14 00582 g008
Figure 8. Pedigree completeness level in the whole set of pedigree data (GS and GD, grandparents; GGS and GGD, great-grandparents).
Figure 8. Pedigree completeness level in the whole set of pedigree data (GS and GD, grandparents; GGS and GGD, great-grandparents).
Animals 14 00582 g008
Table 1. Longevity of parent ewes in Tuscany.
Table 1. Longevity of parent ewes in Tuscany.
ProvinceLongevity
RamsEwes
NMeanSDNMeanSD
Arezzo 17.3-
Florence26.02.99425.02.47
Grosseto422.41.6310937.13.27
Livorno245.74.632168.33.39
Lucca5413.15.3631488.74.21
Massa Carrara8111.56.90208210.75.28
Pisa1712.46.4739548.43.73
Pistoia1145.04.3923447.13.13
Siena25.00.52717.02.37
Table 2. Main genealogical parameters computed for the Massese sheep pedigree.
Table 2. Main genealogical parameters computed for the Massese sheep pedigree.
WP (n):31,156
Males 1328
Females 29,828
Sires 660
Dams 12,662
Number of individuals with both parents known12,602
Inbreds 2790
Full-sib groups:1486
-Average value2.15
-Max6
-Min2
BP:18,554
-Both parents unknown 17,710
-Only mother known784
-Only father known60
RP 2007–202124,586
Number of individuals with both parents known10,803
Inbreds2713
Table 3. Population statistics on average inbreeding in animals registered in each province (2001–2021).
Table 3. Population statistics on average inbreeding in animals registered in each province (2001–2021).
ProvinceHerds (n)Registered
Animals
(n)		Animals with Both Parents Known (n)Average
F
(%)		ANR
(%)		Inbred
Animals
(n)		Average F
for
Inbreds
Arezzo1231 0.540.0010.125
Florence110424 0.231.9010.240
Grosseto122847527 0.190.20290.188
Livorno1376375 3.9011.61270.115
Lucca3273902793 1.600.407970.144
Massa Carrara2149083722 3.101.5012050.128
Pisa2668791267 0.050.06170.192
Pistoia1449833698 1.700.506140.138
Siena3297195 0.301.60150.052
Table 4. F distribution in the RP and in each province.
Table 4. F distribution in the RP and in each province.
RangeRPProvince
(n°)ArFiGrLiLuMsPiPtSi
0.00 < F < 0.05447 5291081982987
0.05 < F < 0.10632 3616031211158
0.10 < F < 0.157201 6361782956202
0.15 < F < 0.20319 8106156 49
0.20 < F < 0.25492 118111651607130
0.25 < F < 0.3095 1394717
0.30 < F < 0.3548 51420 9
0.35 < F < 0.4034 0255 4
0.40 < F < 0.453 12
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Giuliotti, L.; Benvenuti, M.N.; Preziuso, G.; Ventura, E.; Fresi, P.; Cecchi, F. Demography and Genealogical Analysis of Massese Sheep, a Native Breed of Tuscany. Animals 2024, 14, 582. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14040582

AMA Style

Giuliotti L, Benvenuti MN, Preziuso G, Ventura E, Fresi P, Cecchi F. Demography and Genealogical Analysis of Massese Sheep, a Native Breed of Tuscany. Animals. 2024; 14(4):582. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14040582

Chicago/Turabian Style

Giuliotti, Lorella, Maria Novella Benvenuti, Giovanna Preziuso, Emilia Ventura, Pancrazio Fresi, and Francesca Cecchi. 2024. "Demography and Genealogical Analysis of Massese Sheep, a Native Breed of Tuscany" Animals 14, no. 4: 582. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14040582

APA Style

Giuliotti, L., Benvenuti, M. N., Preziuso, G., Ventura, E., Fresi, P., & Cecchi, F. (2024). Demography and Genealogical Analysis of Massese Sheep, a Native Breed of Tuscany. Animals, 14(4), 582. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14040582

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop