Genome-wide identification of quantitative trait loci in a cross between Hampshire and Landrace II: Meat quality traits

Markljung, Ellen; Braunschweig, M; Karlskov-Mortensen, Peter; Bruun, Camilla Vibeke Sichlau; Sawera, Milena; Cho, In-Cheol; Hedebro-Velander, Ingela; Josell, Åsa; Lundström, Kerstin; Seth, Gertrud von; Jørgensen, Claus B.; Fredholm, Merete; Andersson, Leif

doi:10.1186/1471-2156-9-22

Cited by 39 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These distances were collected in one matrix in an Excel spread sheet. These distances were subsequently analysed using a principal component analysis (PCA, no rotation) on stakeholder group level using R package FactoMineR (Markljung et al 2008). PCA was used to reduce the dimensionality of the dataset (both the number of terms and the number of participants are large).…”

Section: Assessment Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Same Pig, Different Conclusions: Stakeholders Differ in Qualitative Behaviour Assessment

Duijvesteijn

Benard

Reimert

et al. 2014

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal welfare in pig production is frequently a topic of debate and is sensitive in nature. This debate is partly due to differences in values, forms, convictions, interests and knowledge among the stakeholders that constitute differences among their frames of reference with respect to pigs and their welfare. Differences in frames of reference by stakeholder groups are studied widely, but not specifically with respect to animal behaviour or welfare. We explored this phenomenon using a qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA). Participating stakeholders were classified into two expert groups consisting of pig farmers (N = 11) and animal scientists (N = 18) and a lay-group consisting of urban citizens (N = 15). The stakeholders were asked to observe the behaviour of a specific pig in each of the nine videos and to assign a score for each video using 21 predefined terms describing the mood, such as 'happy' or 'irritated'. They were asked to complete two additional questionnaires to obtain information on their frames of reference. Results from the QBA showed -014-9513-z that the pig farmers observed the behaviour of pigs more positively than the urban citizens and the animal scientists. This was evident from the consistently higher scores on the positive terms to assess pig behaviour. The questionnaires revealed that the farmers had a different frames of reference regarding pigs and different understanding of welfare, which might explain the differences in assessment. In a follow-up stakeholder workshop, which focussed on differences in observation, QBA showed to be an effective tool to stimulate mutual learning among stakeholders, which is necessary to find shared solutions.123 J Agric Environ Ethics (2014) 27:1019-1047 DOI 10.1007/s10806

show abstract

Section: Assessment Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Same Pig, Different Conclusions: Stakeholders Differ in Qualitative Behaviour Assessment

Duijvesteijn

Benard

Reimert

et al. 2014

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous genome scans for production trait studies using multi-generational livestock resource populations have incorporated the effect of imprinting and monoallelic expression Rattink et al, 2000;Nezer et al, 2002;Holl et al, 2004;Kim et al, 2004b;Karlskov-Mortensen et al, 2006;Markljung et al, 2008;Duthie et al, 2009). In this study, however, it was not possible to include parent-of-origin effects in our statistical analyses as the Limousin population used was not multigenerational.…”

Section: Snp Validation In Candidate Bovine Imprinted Genesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A catalogue of validated single nucleotide polymorphisms in bovine orthologs of mammalian imprinted genes and associations with beef production traits

Magee

Berkowicz

Sikora

et al. 2010

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetic (or 'genomic') imprinting, a feature of approximately 100 mammalian genes, results in monoallelic expression from one of the two parentally inherited chromosomes. To date, most studies have been directed on imprinted genes in murine or human models; however, there is burgeoning interest in the effects of imprinted genes in domestic livestock species. In particular, attention has focused on imprinted genes that influence foetal growth and development and that are associated with several economically important production traits in cattle, sheep and pigs. We have re-sequenced regions in 20 candidate bovine imprinted genes in order to validate single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that may influence important production traits in cattle. Putative SNPs detected via re-sequencing were subsequently re-formatted for high-throughput SNP genotyping in 185 cattle samples comprising 138 performance-tested European Bos taurus (all Limousin bulls), 29 African B. taurus and 18 Indian B. indicus samples. Analysis of the resulting genotypic data identified 117 validated SNPs. Preliminary genotype-phenotype association analyses using 83 SNPs that were polymorphic in the Limousin samples with minor allele frequencies >0.05 revealed significant associations between two candidate bovine imprinted genes and a range of important beef production traits: average daily gain, average feed intake, live weight, feed conversion ratio, residual feed intake and residual gain. These genes were the Ras proteinspecific guanine nucleotide releasing factor gene ( RASGRF1) and the zinc finger, imprinted 2 gene ( ZIM2). Despite the relatively small sample size used in these analyses, the observed associations with production traits are supported by the purported biological function of the RASGRF1 and ZIM2 gene products. These results support the hypothesis that imprinted genes contribute significantly to important complex production traits in cattle. Furthermore, these SNPs may be usefully incorporated into future marker-assisted and genomic selection breeding schemes.

show abstract

“…Our research team performed a QTL study in a Hampshire × Finnish Landrace cross by using detailed phenotypic data. The 2 breeds were selected because Hampshire pigs were never used in a QTL study but differ significantly in several traits from other breeds (Karlskov-Mortensen et al 2006;Markljung et al 2008). The impressive number of QTL studies, continuously performed, demonstrates that still considerable genetic variation is segregating in farm animals.…”

Section: From Qtl Detection To Qtn Identificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutations in the bovineABCG2 and the ovineMSTN gene added to the few quantitative trait nucleotides identified in farm animals: a mini-review

Braunschweig

2010

J Appl Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The progress in molecular genetics in animal breeding is moderately effective as compared to traditional animal breeding using quantitative genetic approaches. There is an extensive disparity between the number of reported quantitative trait loci (QTLs) and their linked genetic variations in cattle, pig, and chicken. The identification of causative mutations affecting quantitative traits is still very challenging and hampered by the cloudy relationship between genotype and phenotype. There are relatively few reports in which a successful identification of a causative mutation for an animal production trait was demonstrated. The examples that have attracted considerable attention from the animal breeding community are briefly summarized and presented in a table. In this mini-review, the recent progress in mapping quantitative trait nucleotides (QTNs) are reviewed, including the ABCG2 gene mutation that underlies a QTL for fat and protein content and the ovine MSTN gene mutation that causes muscular hypertrophy in Texel sheep. It is concluded that the progress in molecular genetics might facilitate the elucidation of the genetic architecture of QTLs, so that also the high-hanging fruits can be harvested in order to contribute to efficient and sustainable animal production.

show abstract

Genome-wide identification of quantitative trait loci in a cross between Hampshire and Landrace II: Meat quality traits

Cited by 39 publications

References 25 publications

Same Pig, Different Conclusions: Stakeholders Differ in Qualitative Behaviour Assessment

Same Pig, Different Conclusions: Stakeholders Differ in Qualitative Behaviour Assessment

A catalogue of validated single nucleotide polymorphisms in bovine orthologs of mammalian imprinted genes and associations with beef production traits

Mutations in the bovineABCG2 and the ovineMSTN gene added to the few quantitative trait nucleotides identified in farm animals: a mini-review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About