A 2,656 bp fragment of chicken ghrelin gene was cloned and SNPs were detected by PCR-RFLP and Allele Specific PCR (ASP) in 12 Chinese indigenous chicken breeds and a commercial chicken population. The results showed that there were 23 base variations and an amino acid change (Gln→Arg) in cloned chicken ghrelin gene. Three SNPs were confirmed in 13 populations and associations between this gene and growth traits of Tibetan chicken (TC) and Recessive White chicken (RW) were investigated. The results of haplotype analysis revealed that 26 haplotype genotypes were composed of eight haplotypes. The results of x 2 tests indicated that there were significant differences between genotypes or haplotype genotype frequencies in some of the breeds or sexes at 0.05 or 0.01 levels. The results of ANOVA revealed that there were significant differences between genotypes or haplotype genotypes on some growth traits of TC and RW chicken breeds at 0.05 or 0.01 levels. Multiple comparisons showed that there were significant associations between genotype CT at site 71 and some growth traits of two chicken breeds and between genotype AG at site 1,215 and body weight at 16 wk of two chicken breeds, and there was a significant association between haplotype genotype CAA/CAG and body weight and shank girth at 16 wk of two chicken breeds.

G (1-5)-NH2, G (1-7)-NH2, and G (1-9) are the active fragments of ghrelin. The aim of this study was to investigate the antinociceptive effects, their ability to cross the blood–brain barrier, and the receptor mechanism(s) of these fragments using the tail withdrawal test in male Kunming mice. The antinociceptive effects of these fragments (2, 6, 20, and 60 nmol/mouse) were tested at 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 min after intravenous (i.v.) injection. These fragments induced dose- and time-related antinociceptive effects relative to saline. Using the near infrared fluorescence imaging experiments, our results showed that these fragments could cross the brain–blood barrier and enter the brain. The antinociceptive effects of these fragments were completely antagonized by naloxone (intracerebroventricular, i.c.v.); however, naloxone methiodide (intraperitoneal, i.p.), which is the peripheral restricted opioid receptor antagonist, did not antagonize these antinociceptive effects. Furthermore, the GHS-R1α antagonist [D-Lys3]-GHRP-6 (i.c.v.) completely antagonized these antinociceptive effects, too. These results suggested that these fragments induced antinociceptive effects through central opioid receptors and GHS-R1α. In conclusion, our studies indicated that these active fragments of ghrelin could cross the brain–blood barrier and enter the brain and induce antinociceptive effects through central opioid receptors and GHS-R1α after intravenous injection.