# Duck (Anas platyrhynchos) linkage mapping by AFLP fingerprinting

Chang-Wen Huang, Yu-Shin Cheng, Roger Rouvier, Kuo-Tai Yang, Chean-Ping Wu, Hsiu-Lin Huang, Mu-Chiou Huang

► To cite this version:

Chang-Wen Huang, Yu-Shin Cheng, Roger Rouvier, Kuo-Tai Yang, Chean-Ping Wu, et al.. Duck (Anas platyrhynchos) linkage mapping by AFLP fingerprinting. Genetics Selection Evolution, 2009, 41, online (march), Non paginé. 10.1186/1297-9686-41-28. [hal-02663467](https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02663467)

HAL Id: hal-02663467

https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02663467

Submitted on 31 May 2020

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Research

Open Access

# Duck (*Anas platyrhynchos*) linkage mapping by AFLP fingerprinting

Chang-Wen Huang¹,², Yu-Shin Cheng³, Roger Rouvier⁴, Kuo-Tai Yang¹,⁵, Chean-Ping Wu¹,⁶, Hsiu-Lin Huang¹ and Mu-Chiou Huang*¹

Address: ¹Department of Animal Science, National Chung Hsing University, 250 Kuo-Kung Road, Taichung 402, Taiwan, ²Institute of Cellular and Organism Biology, Academia Sinica, 128 Section 2, Academia Road, Nankang, Taipei 115, Taiwan, ³Livestock Research Institute, Council of Agriculture, Hsin-Hua, Tainan 712, Taiwan, ⁴Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Station d'Amélioration Génétique des Animaux, Centre de Recherches de Toulouse, BP52627, F31326 Castanet-Tolosan Cedex, France, ⁵Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, 128 Section 2, Academia Road, Nankang, Taipei 115, Taiwan and ⁶Department of Animal Science, National Chiayi University, 300 Syuefu Road, Chiayi 600, Taiwan

Email: Chang-Wen Huang - amino0116@yahoo.com.tw; Yu-Shin Cheng - yushin@mail.tlri.gov.tw; Roger Rouvier - rouvier@germinal.toulouse.inra.fr; Kuo-Tai Yang - ktyang@ibms.sinica.edu.tw; Chean-Ping Wu - wucheanp@yahoo.com.tw; Hsiu-Lin Huang - hlhuang2001@yahoo.com; Mu-Chiou Huang* - mchuang@mail.nchu.edu.tw

Published: 17 March 2009

Received: 7 March 2009

Genetics Selection Evolution 2009, 41:28 doi:10.1186/1297-9686-41-28

Accepted: 17 March 2009

This article is available from: http://www.gsejournal.org/content/41/1/28

© 2009 Huang et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

## Abstract

Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) with multicolored fluorescent molecular markers was used to analyze duck (*Anas platyrhynchos*) genomic DNA and to construct the first AFLP genetic linkage map. These markers were developed and genotyped in 766 F2 individuals from six families from a cross between two different selected duck lines, brown Tsaiya and Pekin. Two hundred and ninety-six polymorphic bands (64% of all bands) were detected using 18 pairs of fluorescent TaqI/EcoRI primer combinations. Each primer set produced a range of 7 to 29 fragments in the reactions, and generated on average 16.4 polymorphic bands. The AFLP linkage map included 260 co-dominant markers distributed in 32 linkage groups. Twenty-one co-dominant markers were not linked with any other marker. Each linkage group contained three to 63 molecular markers and their size ranged between 19.0 cM and 171.9 cM. This AFLP linkage map provides important information for establishing a duck chromosome map, for mapping quantitative trait loci (QTL mapping) and for breeding applications.

## Introduction

Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) is an application of the DNA fingerprinting technique proposed by Vos *et al.* [1], which is a clever combination of two older methods, restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) [2] and random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) [3-5], generating a large number of genetic markers from any genomic DNA [6]. AFLP markers are inherited in a Mendelian fashion and can be detected as co-dominant markers [7]. Since Ajmone-Marsan *et al.* [8], several studies have shown that AFLP markers follow

Mendelian inheritance rules and that the technique is highly reproducible, powerful and efficient [9]. Thus AFLP analysis is a useful tool to generate linkage maps [10].

Linkage maps using AFLP, microsatellite or SNP markers have been established and applied extensively to linkage studies or quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping in animals such as rats [11], rabbits [12], goats [13], sheep [14], cattle [15], chickens [16-20], turkeys [21], quails [22,23], and fish [24,25]. They have also been much used for genome mapping, studies on disease resistance and drug

<footnote>* Corresponding author</footnote>
tolerance in economic crops and other experimental
plants such as sorghum [26], *Arabidopsis thaliana* [27], rice
[28], corn [29], barley [30] and wheat [31].

Ducks are appreciated for meat and eggs. Research on
duck genetics and breeding has been developed only in
recent years [32]. For detecting and mapping QTL, the
construction of a genetic linkage map is a prerequisite and
in duck genetic map data are very limited. Huang *et al.*
[33] have reported a preliminary genetic linkage map in
an inbred Pekin ducks resource population using micros-
atellite markers. The advantage of AFLP is that a large
number of markers can be generated with a smaller
number of primer pairs than required when using micro-
satellites. This is especially true when working in a species
for which only few microsatellite markers are available. A
large number of microsatellite markers may be obtained if
enough time and financial support are available. In this
study, we have chosen the AFLP technique to develop a
duck genetic map. We have used the *Taql/EcoRI* restriction
enzyme combination and selective PCR primers to gener-
ate molecular genetic markers and to establish a duck
genetic linkage map from a resource population originat-
ing from a cross between two outbred selected lines of lay-
ing and meat type ducks. This is a first step to provide vital
information to construct chromosome maps and map
QTL for future applications in duck breeding.

**Methods**

Animals and blood collection

All ducks tested in the study originate from the Livestock
Research Institute, Council of Agriculture (LRI-COA). In
the first generation F0, each of three brown Tsaiya drakes
and three Pekin drakes were mated either to two Pekin
ducks or to two brown Tsaiya female ducks, respectively.
Six F1 drakes originating from the six F0 sires were mated
individually, according to the mating plan, with three
(one case) or six (five cases) unrelated F1 dams that were
daughters of one F0 drake of the same breed brown Tsaiya
or Pekin. F2 birds belonging to six half-sib families were
used as the mapping population. The number of birds in
the resource population was as follows: six males and 12
females in the F0, six males and 33 females in the F1 and
766 males and females in the F2. A total of 766 F2 animals
were genotyped. Blood samples obtained from the vein of
the ducks wings were carefully mixed with anticoagulant
and kept at 4°C for subsequent DNA extraction.

Genomic DNA extraction

DNA extraction procedures were performed according to
the method described by Huang *et al.* [34]. Eighty µL of
each blood sample were mixed thoroughly with 1 mL of
TNE buffer solution (10 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0, 150 mM
NaCl, 10 mM EDTA pH 8.0) in a 1.5 mL centrifuge tube
and centrifuged at 1,500 × g (Hermle Model Z233 MK,

Maryland, USA) for 5 min to wash the cells. They were
then resuspended in 300 µL 10% NH₄Cl, 75 µL proteinase
K (10 mg/mL), 25 µL collagenase (3.8 IU/µL), and 200 µL
10% w/v SDS and the mixture was incubated at 42°C for
24 h, with agitation. A series of extractions was performed
with a same volume of phenol, phenol/chloroform (con-
taining 1/25 v/v isoamyl alcohol), and chloroform,
respectively. Centrifugation conditions were 3,000 × g
(Model SCT5B, HITACHI) for 10 min, then samples were
precipitated with isopropanol. Excess isopropanol was
removed using 70% ethanol. The DNA was vacuum-dried
(Speed Vac® SC110, Rotor RH 40-11, SAVANT) and resus-
pended in double distilled water. The DNA was quantified
with an S2000 UV/Vis Diode-Array Spectrophotometer
(WAP Co. Ltd., Cambridge, UK) to determine its absorb-
ance and to confirm DNA purity and concentration for
AFLP analysis.

**Analysis of genotypes using AFLP markers**

AFLP analysis was carried out according to the procedures
described by Vos et al. [1]. All sequences for the EcoRI and
Taql adapters and primers used in this study are shown in
Table 1. Briefly, 400–500 ng of genomic DNA (50 ng/µL)
was digested with 0.5 µL EcoRI restriction endonuclease
(20 U/µL) with 1 µL of 10× EcoRI buffer (50 mM NaCl,
100 mM Tris-HCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 0.025% Triton X-100,
pH 7.5) (New England BioLabs® Inc., Ipswich, MA, USA)
in a total volume of 10 µL. The mixture was incubated at
37°C for 4 h and then at 65°C for 10 min. Subsequently,
the sample was digested with 0.5 µL Taql restriction endo-
nuclease (20 U/µL) with 1.5 µL of 10× Taql buffer (100
mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, 10 mM MgCl2 pH 8.4) (New
England BioLabs® Inc., Ipswich, MA, USA), then mixed
with 0.15 µL of 100× BSA in a total volume of 15 µL and
incubated at 65°C for 4 h with a last step at 80°C for 10
min. Adaptor ligation was performed by adding 1 µL of
Taql-adaptor (50 ng/µL), 0.1 µL of EcoRI-adaptor (50 ng/
µL), 1 µL of T4 DNA ligase (1 U/µL) and 5 µL of 5× ligase
buffer (250 mM Tris-HCl pH 7.6, 50 mM MgCl2, 5 mM
ATP, 5 mM DTT, 25% polyethylene glycol-8000) (Invitro-
gen Co., Carlsbad, CA, USA). The mixture was made up to
25 µL with double-distilled water and incubated at 23°C
for 12 h. DNA pre-amplification was performed in a
GeneAmp® PCR system 2700 thermocycler (Applied Bio-
systems, Singapore) with a final volume of 20 µL contain-
ing 6 µL of the DNA sample, 1 µL of Taql+A primer (50
ng/µL), 1 µL of EcoRI+A primer (50 ng/µL), 1.6 µL of 2.5
mM dNTPs, 0.25 µL of DyNAzyme™ DNA polymerase (2
U/µL, F-501L, Finnzymes Oy, Espoo, Finland), and 2 µL
of 10× PCR buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.8, 15 mM
MgCl2, 500 mM KCl, 1% Triton X-100). The following
PCR conditions were used: a denaturing step for 5 min at
94°C, 20 cycles at 94°C for 30 s, 56°C for 1 min and
72°C for 1 min and a final extension step at 72°C for 5
min. A second PCR reaction was performed in a final
<table><caption>Table 1: Sequences of adapters and primers used in the AFLP detection</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Name</th><th>Sequence</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Adapter EcoRI</td><td>Eco Top Strand<br>Eco Bottom Strand</td><td>5-CTCGTAGACTGCGTACC<br>5-AATTGGTACGCAGTCTAC</td></tr><tr><td>Adapter Taql</td><td>Taq Top Strand<br>Taq Bottom Strand</td><td>5-GACGATGAGTCCTGAC<br>5-CGGTCAGGACTCAT</td></tr><tr><td>Primer EcoRI</td><td>EcoR+A<br>E1 VIC-EcoR+AAA<br>E2 NED-EcoR+AAC<br>E3 PET-EcoR+AAG<br>E4 FAM-EcoR+ACA<br>E5 VIC-EcoR+AC<br>E6 FAM-EcoR+AG</td><td>5-GAC TGC GTA CCG TAC CA<br>5-GAC TGC GTA CCG TAC CAA A<br>5-GAC TGC GTA CCG TAC CAA C<br>5-GAC TGC GTA CCG TAC CAA G<br>5-GAC TGC GTA CCG TAC CAC A<br>5-GAC TGC GTA CCG TAC CAC<br>5-GAC TGC GTA CCG TAC CAG</td></tr><tr><td>Primer Taql</td><td>Taq+A<br>T1 Taq+AAC<br>T2 Taq+AAG<br>T3 Taq+AAT<br>T4 Taq+ACA<br>T5 Taq+AC<br>T6 Taq+AG</td><td>5-GAT GAG TCC TGA CCG AA<br>5-GAT GAG TCC TGA CCG AAA C<br>5-GAT GAG TCC TGA CCG AAA G<br>5-GAT GAG TCC TGA CCG AAA T<br>5-GAT GAG TCC TGA CCG AAC A<br>5-GAT GAG TCC TGA CCG AAC<br>5-GAT GAG TCC TGA CCG AAG</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>Table 2: Conditions of selective amplification PCR</caption><thead><tr><th>Hold</th><th></th><th>Cycle</th><th></th><th>Number of cycles</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="6">94°C, 5 min</td><td>94°C, 30 s</td><td>66°C, 30 s</td><td>72°C, 1 min</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>94°C, 30 s</td><td>64°C, 30 s</td><td>72°C, 1 min</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>94°C, 30 s</td><td>62°C, 30 s</td><td>72°C, 1 min</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>94°C, 30 s</td><td>60°C, 30 s</td><td>72°C, 1 min</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>94°C, 30 s</td><td>58°C, 30 s</td><td>72°C, 1 min</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>94°C, 30 s</td><td>56°C, 30 s</td><td>72°C, 1 min</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">4°C, forever</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>72°C, 5 min</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table>

volume of 5 µL containing 0.5 µL of the pre-amplification PCR products, 1 µL of Taql+ANN selective primer (50 ng/µL), 1 µL fluorescent dye-labeled EcoRI+ANN selective primer (50 ng/µL) with either VIC (green), NED (yellow), PET (red) or FAM (blue) 0.3 µL of 2.5 mM dNTPs, 0.25 µL of DyNzyme™ DNA polymerase (2 U/µL), and 0.5 µL of 10× buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.3, 1.5 mM MgCl₂, 50 mM KCl). Conditions for the selective amplification PCR are shown in Table 2.

Equal volumes of each of the four PCR products with different color fluorescent markers (either VIC, NED, PET or FAM) were combined, diluted and mixed with double-distilled water and mixed. Then, 1 µL of the diluted PCR product mixture was added to 0.2 µL of GeneScan-500 LIZ internal lane size standard (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) and 10.8 µL of deionized formamide, denatured for 3 min at 94°C and immediately after placed

on ice for 5 min. Capillary electrophoresis was performed on an ABI PRISM® 3100 Avant Genetic Analyzer using the GS STR POP-6 F module column (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). Fluorescent peak signals for each primer combination were collected with the ABI PRISM® 3100 Genetic Analyzer Data Collection 1.1 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). The resulting genotyping data were scanned and analyzed with the software ABI PRISM™ GeneScan 3.7 and Genotyper 3.7 software package (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA), which displayed the AFLP fingerprints and quantified the polymorphic peaks. AFLP markers were named according to the serial number based on the extension sequence of Taql and EcoRI primer combination (Table 3) and to the size of the fragment in base pairs. Polymorphic markers from duck individuals belonging to the same family were scored according to the different heights and distributions of peak signals using the Genotyper software.
<table><caption>Table 3: Number of detected polymorphisms per primer pair 3' end extensions of EcoRI and Taql primers are shown; EcoRI primers are fluorescently labeled</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="2">Primer extensions<sup>1</sup></th><th>Nb of peaks</th><th colspan="2">Polymorphic markers</th><th colspan="2">Mapped marker</th><th></th></tr><tr><th>Taql</th><th>EcoRI, labeled</th><th></th><th>No.</th><th>%</th><th>No.</th><th>%</th><th>Size range of peaks (bp)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>AAC</td><td>AAA, VIC</td><td>33</td><td>20</td><td>61</td><td>18</td><td>90</td><td>61–399</td></tr><tr><td>AAC</td><td>AAC, NED</td><td>28</td><td>19</td><td>68</td><td>13</td><td>68</td><td>60–260</td></tr><tr><td>AAC</td><td>AAG, PET</td><td>15</td><td>9</td><td>60</td><td>8</td><td>89</td><td>84–282</td></tr><tr><td>AAC</td><td>ACA, FAM</td><td>34</td><td>24</td><td>71</td><td>21</td><td>88</td><td>91–467</td></tr><tr><td>AAG</td><td>AAA, VIC</td><td>36</td><td>22</td><td>61</td><td>18</td><td>82</td><td>41–261</td></tr><tr><td>AAG</td><td>AAC, NED</td><td>14</td><td>9</td><td>64</td><td>8</td><td>89</td><td>61–205</td></tr><tr><td>AAG</td><td>AAG, PET</td><td>17</td><td>11</td><td>65</td><td>11</td><td>100</td><td>45–195</td></tr><tr><td>AAG</td><td>ACA, FAM</td><td>21</td><td>13</td><td>62</td><td>13</td><td>100</td><td>46–349</td></tr><tr><td>AAT</td><td>AAA, VIC</td><td>41</td><td>25</td><td>61</td><td>21</td><td>84</td><td>44–325</td></tr><tr><td>AAT</td><td>AAC, NED</td><td>12</td><td>8</td><td>67</td><td>7</td><td>88</td><td>52–216</td></tr><tr><td>AAT</td><td>AAG, PET</td><td>16</td><td>9</td><td>56</td><td>7</td><td>78</td><td>108–282</td></tr><tr><td>AAT</td><td>ACA, FAM</td><td>29</td><td>18</td><td>62</td><td>17</td><td>94</td><td>91–239</td></tr><tr><td>ACA</td><td>AAA, VIC</td><td>27</td><td>20</td><td>74</td><td>19</td><td>95</td><td>39–354</td></tr><tr><td>ACA</td><td>AAC, NED</td><td>23</td><td>14</td><td>61</td><td>12</td><td>86</td><td>39–284</td></tr><tr><td>ACA</td><td>AAG, PET</td><td>19</td><td>13</td><td>68</td><td>10</td><td>77</td><td>41–233</td></tr><tr><td>ACA</td><td>ACA, FAM</td><td>13</td><td>7</td><td>54</td><td>7</td><td>100</td><td>81–283</td></tr><tr><td>AC</td><td>AC, VIC</td><td>42</td><td>26</td><td>62</td><td>23</td><td>88</td><td>46–349</td></tr><tr><td>AG</td><td>AG, FAM</td><td>45</td><td>29</td><td>64</td><td>27</td><td>93</td><td>56–382</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>465</td><td>296</td><td>64</td><td>260</td><td>88</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

## Construction of linkage maps

Each polymorphic marker was analyzed by Chi-square tests. Markers heterozygous in both F1 parents and significantly ($P = 0.05$) fitting a 1:2:1 ratio (Mendelian inheritance) with the ratio of the numbers of individual genotypes A, H and B, were counted. Linkage analysis was performed by CarteBlanche software (Keygene, Wageningen, Netherlands) following the instructions of the manufacturer. Briefly, each F2 genotype data from every family was imported. Linkage groups were constructed by the 'linkage phase establishment' function, calculating the recombination frequency ($\theta$) between pairs of markers and the decimal logarithm of the odds ratio score (LOD score). Significant linkage was defined by a LOD score $\ge$ 3.0. Map distances were calculated according to the Kosambi mapping function. The linkage maps were drawn by MapChart 2.2 [35] and denominated in accordance to the calculated length orders of linkage groups.

## Results

### Polymorphisms of fluorescent markers

The number and the size range of the detected AFLP polymorphisms are shown in Table 3. Two hundred and ninety-six polymorphic markers (64% of all peaks) were produced. Each primer pair produced between seven and 29 polymorphic markers (16.4 markers on average). This indicated that multicolor fluorescence detection with AFLP markers is a high throughput, timesaving and easily analyzed DNA fingerprinting technique. It can be applied

to investigate genetic linkage and polymorphism in a population.

### Linkage mapping

Histograms, created by ABI PRISM™ Genotyper 3.7 of signal heights from an AFLP marker, are shown in Figure 1 and can be classified into three genotypes: homozygous present (A), heterozygous (H) and homozygous absent (B). Genotype data that were missed or could not be scored are indicated as genotype (U). After polymorphism analysis and $\chi^2$ tests, 281 AFLP markers obtained from the genomic DNA of six duck families could be used for linkage analysis. Phases of all the linkage group markers were established by the 'linkage phase establishment' function in the CarteBlanche software (Keygene, Wageningen, Netherlands). Calculating recombination frequencies ($\theta$), LOD scores and map distances for markers in each linkage group provided an optimum order of markers. Then, linkage maps were constructed using MapChart 2.2 [35] and they were denominated according to the calculated length orders of the linkage groups. Figure 2 shows the linkage group maps comprising 260 markers placed in 32 linkage groups. Twenty-one markers were not linked with any other marker. The number of markers in each linkage group ranged between three and 63 with 11 major groups containing 7 to 63 markers and 21 minor groups containing three to four markers. One hundred and fifty-seven of the mapped markers (60%) originated from seven linkage groups containing 10 to 63 markers. The lengths of the

<footnote n="1">¹ Sequence of the two or three selective nucleotides at the 3' end of the AFLP primer</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1** Histogram created by ABI PRISM™ Genotyper 3.7 of signal heights from an AFLP marker in 179 F2 ducks from a single half-sib family. Three categories are manually defined, displaying signals characterized as genotype (B) when the marker is homozygous absent, genotype (H) when the marker is heterozygous, and genotype (A) when the marker is homozygous present. Signals outside the categories are characterized as genotype (U).</figcaption></figure>

linkage groups varied between 19.9 and 171.9 cM. The total length of the map was 1,766 cM, with an average interval distance of 7.75 cM between two consecutive markers, the spacing between adjacent markers ranging from 0.0 cM to 33.3 cM. The results of the marker density analysis showed that the linkage group LG-1 had the highest density with 63 markers for 171 cM, whilst the LG-11 linkage group had the lowest density with three markers for 61.4 cM.

**Discussion**

One purpose of the resource population produced in this work was to generate individuals with a maximum of heterozygous markers in its F1 generation. This resource population originated from a cross between two genetically

different lines: a laying brown Tsaiya line selected for long duration of fertility [36,37] and a Pekin duck line selected as grand parent to produce mule ducks for roasting. Six F1 drakes from the six F0 sires were each mated with three (one case) or six (five cases) unrelated F1 dams, which were daughters of one F0 drake of the same breed brown Tsaiya or Pekin. Using AFLP markers to screen genotypes on every F2 individual from each family, we found that 281 markers (60% of all bands) conformed to Mendelian segregation. These genotype results demonstrate that pedigree information from integrated family generations is important for scoring AFLP marker genotypes. In this duck population, we observed very little segregation distortion and genotyping errors. These results show also that AFLPs can be scored as bi-allelic co-dominant mark-
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2**
AFLP genetic linkage map of the ducks. Two hundred and sixty of the markers were assigned to 32 linkage groups in six families by CarteBlanche linkage software. Map distances (centimorgan, cM) were indicated to the left of the maps and calculated using the Kosambi mapping function. The names of the markers are indicated to the right of the maps.</figcaption></figure>

ers in ducks, increasing the information content when compared to bi-allelic dominant markers and facilitating linkage and QTL analyses.

Using primer combinations labeled with multicolor fluorescent dyes and a fragment scanning system from ABI PRISM® 3100 Avant Genetic Analyzer, it will be possible to greatly increase the quantity and density of markers in a linkage group to build more detailed and better integrated genetic linkage maps. Due to the GC rich and gene-dense nature of bird microchromosomes [38,23], double digestion with EcoRI and TaqI restriction enzymes was performed. The sequences of adapters and primers (Table 1) and the conditions of selective amplification PCR (Table 2) were designed and adapted according to the method described by Herbergs et al. [19]. The average number of polymorphic fragments generated by each primer pair was

8.5 [19], 10.5 [20] in chickens and 18 in quails [23]. Our results indicate that in duck the average number of fragments is 16.4. This discrepancy may be due to species differences and to differences in the selection of primer combinations. The present results demonstrate that AFLP can produce a large amount of polymorphic markers in duck genomic DNA (Table 3). Therefore, AFLP markers are useful for linkage analysis in ducks.

For a given number of informative meiosis, the higher the LOD score, the closer the distance between two markers, which means there is a high probability that the two markers are located in the same linkage group. The map is relatively dense with an average interval distance between adjacent markers of 7.75 cM. The large number of chromosomes (2n = 80) and especially the presence of microchromosomes [39], make it difficult to build an
exhaustive map and thus the number of linkage groups is smaller than the number of chromosome pairs. However, AFLP markers are expected to provide a better coverage of microchromosomes than microsatellite markers [38,23]. Currently, the use of AFLP marker analysis to establish a genetic linkage map is mainly restricted to plant studies [6]. A recent study applied the microsatellite technique to establish a preliminary genetic linkage map in an inbred Pekin duck resource population [33]. When comparing the results with our current study (Figure 2), AFLP markers produced a higher number of linkage groups (32 vs 19) and an increased marker density (average interval distance 7.75 cM vs 15.04 cM). This difference is mainly caused by the use of different molecular markers, resource populations and analysis methods. However, the microsatellite map made it possible to construct in parallel a cytogenetic map, which is not possible with AFLP markers. Thus, AFLP and microsatellite markers each have their advantages and drawbacks. To date, no large and integrated duck map is available for analysis and comparison. The successful establishment of a duck linkage map using AFLP genetic markers (Figure 2) in this study provides important information to integrate the published microsatellite markers, to set up a duck chromosome map, to map QTL and to develop future breeding applications.

## Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

## Authors' contributions

C-WH carried out the AFLP detection, performed the construction of the map, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. Y-SC participated in the design and supervising the study, provided the duck samples, pedigree and performance information. RR participated in the design and supervising of the study, directed the data analysis, and helped to improve the manuscript. K-TY and C-PW participated in the collection of samples, prepared the genomic DNA and helped to the AFLP detection. H-LH participated in the collection of samples, prepared the genomic DNA, and helped to interpret the data and draft the manuscript. M-CH conceived, designed and supervised the study, succeeded in finding funding and coordination, and finalized the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

## Acknowledgements

This study was funded by a grant awarded by the National Science Council, Executive Yuan, Taiwan (Grant No. NSC92-2313-B005-106).

## References

1. Vos P, Hogers R, Bleeker M, Reijans M, van de Lee T, Hornes M, Frijters A, Pot J, Peleman J, Kuiper M: **AFLP: a new technique for DNA fingerprinting**. *Nucleic Acids Res* 1995, **23**:4407-4414.

2. Sreekumar GP, Smyth JR Jr, Ponce de Leon FA: **Molecular characterization of the Smyth chicken sublines and their parental controls by RFLP and DNA fingerprint analysis**. *Poult Sci* 2001, **80**:1-5.

3. Horng YM, Huang MC: **Male-specific DNA sequences in pigs. Theriogenology** 2003, **59**:841-848.

4. Horng YM, Chen YT, Wu CP, Jea YS, Huang MC: **Cloning of Taiwan water buffalo male-specific DNA sequence for sexing. Theriogenology** 2004, **62**:1536-1543.

5. Yen NT, Tai C, Cheng YS, Huang MC: **Relative genetic effects of Duroc and Taoyun breeds on the economic traits of their hybrids. Asian-Aust J Anim Sci** 2001, **14**:447-454.

6. Bensch S, Akesson M: **Ten years of AFLP in ecology and evolution: why so few animals? Mol Ecol** 2005, **14**:2899-2914.

7. Masiga DK, Turner CM: **Amplified (restriction) fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) analysis. Methods Mol Biol** 2004, **270**:173-186.

8. Ajmone-Marsan P, Valentini A, Cassandro M, Vecchiotti-Antaldi G, Bertoni G, Kuiper M: **AFLP™ markers for DNA fingerprinting in cattle. Anim Genet** 1997, **28**:418-426.

9. Huang CW, Cheng YS, Rouvier R, Yang KT, Wu CP, Huang MC: **AFLP fingerprinting for paternity testing in ducks. Br Poult Sci** 2007, **48**:323-330.

10. Mueller UG, Wolfenbarger LL: **AFLP genotyping and fingerprinting. Trends Ecol Evol** 1999, **14**:389-394.

11. Bonné AC, den Bieman MG, Gillissen GF, Kren V, Krenová D, Bílá V, Zídek V, Kostka V, Musilová A, Pravenec M, van Zutphen BF, van Lith HA: **Genetic map of AFLP markers in the rat (Rattus norvegicus) derived from the H × B/lpcv and B × H/Cub sets of recombinant inbred strains. Biochem Genet** 2003, **41**:77-89.

12. van Haeringen WA, Den Bieman MG, Lankhorst Æ, van Lith HA, van Zutphen LFM: **Application of AFLP markers for QTL mapping in the rabbit. Genome** 2002, **45**:914-921.

13. Vaiman D, Schibler L, Bourgeois F, Oustry A, Amigues Y, Cribiu EP: **A genetic linkage map of the male goat genome. Genetics** 1996, **144**:279-305.

14. McRae AF, Beraldi D: **Examination of a region showing linkage map discrepancies across sheep breeds. Mamm Genome** 2006, **17**:346-353.

15. Ihara N, Takasuga A, Mizoshita K, Takeda H, Sugimoto M, Mizoguchi Y, Hirano T, Itoh T, Watanabe T, Reed KM, Snelling WM, Kappes SM, Beattie CW, Bennett GL, Sugimoto Y: **A comprehensive genetic map of the cattle genome based on 3802 microsatellites. Genome Res** 2004, **14**:1987-1998.

16. Aerts J, Crooijmans R, Cornelissen S, Hemmatian K, Veenendaal T, Jaadar A, van der Poel J, Fillon V, Vignal A, Groenen M: **Integration of chicken genomic resources to enable whole-genome sequencing. Cytogenet Genome Res** 2003, **102**:297-303.

17. Emara MG, Kim H: **Genetic markers and their application in poultry breeding. Poult Sci** 2003, **82**:952-957.

18. Groenen MA, Cheng HH, Bumstead N, Benkel BF, Briles WE, Burke T, Burt DW, Crittenden LB, Dodgson J, Hillel J, Lamont S, de Leon AP, Soller M, Takahashi H, Vignal A: **A consensus linkage map of the chicken genome. Genome Res** 2000, **10**:137-147.

19. Herbergs J, Siwek M, Crooijmans RPMA, Van der Poel JJ, Groenen MAM: **Multicolour fluorescent detection and mapping of AFLP markers in chicken (Gallus domesticus). Anim Genet** 1999, **30**:274-285.

20. Knorr C, Cheng HH, Dodgson JB: **Application of AFLP markers to genome mapping in poultry. Anim Genet** 1999, **30**:28-35.

21. Reed KM, Chaves LD, Garbe JR, Da Y, Harry DE: **Allelic variation and genetic linkage of avian microsatellites in a new turkey population for genetic mapping. Cytogenet Genome Res** 2003, **102**:331-339.

22. Kikuchi S, Fujima D, Sasazaki S, Tsuji S, Mizutani M, Fujiwara A, Man nen H: **Construction of a genetic linkage map of Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) based on AFLP and microsatellite markers. Anim Genet** 2005, **36**:227-231.

23. Roussot O, Feve K, Plisson-Petit F, Pitel F, Faure JM, Beaumont C, Vignal A: **AFLP linkage map of the Japanese quail Coturnix japonica. Genet Sel Evol** 2003, **35**:559-572.

24. Guryev V, Koudijs MJ, Berezikov E, Johnson SL, Plasterk RH, van Eeden FJ, Cuppen E: **Genetic variation in the zebrafish. Genome Res** 2006, **16**:491-497.

25. Watanabe T, Yoshida M, Nakajima M, Taniguchi N: **Linkage mapping of AFLP and microsatellite DNA markers with the body color- and sex-determining loci in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Zool Sci** 2005, **22**:883-889.
26. Klein PE, Klein RR, Cartinhour SW, Ulanch PE, Dong J, Obert JA, Morishige DT, Schlueter SD, Childs KL, Ale M, Mullet JE: **A high-throughput AFLP-based method for constructing integrated genetic and physical maps: progress toward a sorghum genome map**. *Genome Res* 2000, **10**:789-807.

27. Peters JL, Cnops G, Neyt P, Zethof J, Cornelis K, Van Lijsebettens M, Gerats T: **An AFLP-based genome-wide mapping strategy**. *Theor Appl Genet* 2004, **108**:321-327.

28. Zhang QJ, Ye SP, Li JQ, Zhao B, Liang YS, Peng Y, Li P: **Construction of a microsatellite linkage map with two sequenced rice varieties**. *Acta Genet Sinica* 2006, **33**:152-160.

29. Dintinger J, Verger D, Caiveau S, Risterucci AM, Gilles J, Chiroleu F, Courtois B, Reynaud B, Hamon P: **Genetic mapping of maize stripe disease resistance from the Mascarene source**. *Theor Appl Genet* 2005, **111**:347-359.

30. Rostoks N, Mudie S, Cardle L, Russell J, Ramsay L, Booth A, Svensson JT, Wanamaker SI, Walia H, Rodriguez EM, Hedley PE, Liu H, Morris J, Close TJ, Marshall DF, Waugh R: **Genome-wide SNP discovery and linkage analysis in barley based on genes responsive to abiotic stress**. *Mol Genet Genomics* 2005, **274**:515-527.

31. Song QJ, Shi JR, Singh S, Fickus EW, Costa JM, Lewis J, Gill BS, Ward R, Cregan PB: **Development and mapping of microsatellite (SSR) markers in wheat**. *Theor Appl Genet* 2005, **110**:550-560.

32. Cheng YS, Rouvier R, Hu YH, Tai JXL, Tai C: **Breeding and genetics of waterfowl**. *Worlds Poult Sci J* 2003, **59**:509-519.

33. Huang Y, Zhao Y, Haley CS, Hu S, Hao J, Wu C, Li N: **A genetic and cytogenetic map for the duck (Anas platyrhynchos)**. *Genetics* 2006, **173**:287-296.

34. Huang MC, Lin WC, Horng YM, Rouvier R, Huang CW: **Female-specific DNA sequences in geese**. *Br Poult Sci* 2003, **44**:359-364.

35. Voorrips RE: **MapChart, version 2.2: Windows software for the graphical presentation of linkage maps and QTLs**. *Wageningen, Plant Research International*; 2001.

36. Cheng YS, Rouvier R, Poivey JP, Tai JXL, Tai C, Huang SC: **Selection response for the number of fertile eggs of Brown Tsaiya duck (Anas platyrhynchos) after a single insemination with pooled Muscovy (Cairina moschata) semen**. *Genet Sel Evol* 2002, **34**:597-611.

37. Cheng YS, Rouvier R, Poivey JP, Huang HC, Liu HL, Tai C: **Selection responses in duration of fertility and its consequences on hatchability in the intergeneric crossbreeding of ducks**. *Br Poult Sci* 2005, **46**:565-571.

38. Primmer CR, Raudsepp T, Chowdhary BP, Moller AP, Ellegren H: **Low frequency of microsatellites in the avian genome**. *Genome Res* 1997, **7**:471-482.

39. Denjean B, Ducos A, Darre A, Pinton A, Seguela A, Berland H, Fillon V, Darré R: **Caryotypes des canards commun (Anas platyrhynchos), barbarie (Cairina moschata) et de leur hybride**. *Rev Med Vet* 1997, **148**:695-704.

Publish with **BioMed Central** and every
scientist can read your work free of charge

"BioMed Central will be the most significant development for disseminating the results of biomedical research in our lifetime."

Sir Paul Nurse, Cancer Research UK

Your research papers will be:

* available free of charge to the entire biomedical community

* peer reviewed and published immediately upon acceptance

* cited in PubMed and archived on PubMed Central

* yours — you keep the copyright

Submit your manuscript here:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/publishing_adv.asp

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

BioMedcentral