4.7 Article

Copy number variation-based genome wide association study reveals additional variants contributing to meat quality in Swine

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/srep12535

关键词

-

资金

  1. Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Program [ASTIP-IAS02]
  2. National Key Technology R&D Program of China [2011BAD28B01]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31201781]
  4. earmarked fund for Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System, National Technology Program of China [2011ZX08006-003]
  5. Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences Foundation [2014ZL006, 2011cj-5, 2012ZL069, 2014ywf-yb-8]
  6. Agriculture and Food Research Initiative competitive grant from National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) of US Department of Agriculture (USDA) [2011-67015-30183]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pork quality is important both to the meat processing industry and consumers' purchasing attitude. Copy number variation (CNV) is a burgeoning kind of variants that may influence meat quality. In this study, a genome-wide association study (GWAS) was performed between CNVs and meat quality traits in swine. After false discovery rate (FDR) correction, a total of 8 CNVs on 6 chromosomes were identified to be significantly associated with at least one meat quality trait. All of the 8 CNVs were verified by next generation sequencing and six of them were verified by qPCR. Only the haplotype block containing CNV12 is adjacent to significant SNPs associated with meat quality, suggesting the effects of those CNVs were not likely captured by tag SNPs. The DNA dosage and EST expression of CNV12, which overlap with an obesity related gene Netrin-1 (Ntn1), were consistent with Ntn1 RNA expression, suggesting the CNV12 might be involved in the expression regulation of Ntn1 and finally influence meat quality. We concluded that CNVs may contribute to the genetic variations of meat quality beyond SNPs, and several candidate CNVs were worth further exploration.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据