Genetic potential for residual feed intake and diet fed during early- to mid-gestation influences post-natal DNA methylation of imprinted genes in muscle and liver tissues in beef cattle.
beef cattle
epigenetics
imprinted genes
methylation
pre-natal diet
residual feed intake
Journal
Journal of animal science
ISSN: 1525-3163
Titre abrégé: J Anim Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8003002
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 May 2021
01 May 2021
Historique:
received:
19
02
2021
accepted:
12
05
2021
pubmed:
16
5
2021
medline:
1
6
2021
entrez:
15
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Discovery of epigenetic modifications associated with feed efficiency or other economically important traits would increase our understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying these traits. In combination with known genetic markers, this would provide opportunity to improve genomic selection accuracy in cattle breeding programs. It would also allow cattle to be managed to improve favorable gene expression. The objective of this study was to identify variation in DNA methylation between beef cattle of differential pre-natal nutrition and divergent genetic potential for residual feed intake (RFI). Purebred Angus offspring with the genetic potential for either high (HRFI) or low (LRFI) RFI were prenatally exposed to either a restricted maternal diet of 0.5 kg/d average daily gain (ADG) or a moderate maternal diet of 0.7 kg/d ADG from 30 to 150 d of gestation. We performed DNA methylation analysis of differentially methylated regions (DMR) of imprinted genes (Insulin-like growth factor 2 (IGF2) DMR2, IGF2/H19 imprinting control region (ICR) and IGF2 receptor (IGF2R) DMR2) using post-natal samples of longissimus dorsi (LD) muscle taken from male and female calves at birth and weaning, and of LD muscle, semimembranosus (SM) muscle, and liver samples collected from steers at slaughter (17 months of age). Interestingly, for all three DMR investigated in liver, LRFI steers had higher levels of methylation than HRFI steers. In LD muscle, IGF2/H19 ICR methylation differences for heifers at birth were due to pre-natal diet, while for steers at birth they were mostly the result of genetic potential for RFI with LRFI steers again having higher levels of methylation than HRFI steers. While results from repeated measures analysis of DNA methylation in steers grouped by RFI revealed few differences, in steers grouped by diet, we found higher methylation levels of IGF2 DMR2 and IGF2R DMR2 in LD muscle of restricted diet steers at weaning and slaughter than at birth, as well as increased methylation in LD muscle of restricted diet steers compared with moderate diet steers at weaning and/or slaughter. Our results suggest that differential pre-natal nutrition, and divergent genetic potential for RFI, induces tissue- and sex-specific alterations in post-natal IGF2 and IGF2R methylation patterns and that these patterns can vary with age in Angus beef cattle.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33991189
pii: 6276235
doi: 10.1093/jas/skab140
pmc: PMC8160533
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Government of Canada, 2021.
Références
J Anim Sci. 2006 Sep;84(9):2316-37
pubmed: 16908634
J Anim Sci. 2015 Jul;93(7):3331-41
pubmed: 26440002
Biol Reprod. 2005 Dec;73(6):1275-81
pubmed: 16120826
BMC Genomics. 2017 Aug 18;18(1):632
pubmed: 28821223
J Anim Sci. 2009 Apr;87(14 Suppl):E48-63
pubmed: 19028862
Front Genet. 2013 Apr 05;4:49
pubmed: 23577020
J Anim Sci. 2004 Mar;82(3):826-36
pubmed: 15032440
Domest Anim Endocrinol. 2004 Oct;27(3):219-40
pubmed: 15451071
J Anim Sci. 2013 Oct;91(10):4669-78
pubmed: 24078618
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Nov 4;105(44):17046-9
pubmed: 18955703
J Anim Sci. 2013 May;91(5):2067-76
pubmed: 23463551
Genomics. 2009 Jul;94(1):63-9
pubmed: 19341790
Food Sci Anim Resour. 2020 Jan;40(1):132-144
pubmed: 31970337
Physiol Genomics. 2008 Jan 17;32(2):264-72
pubmed: 17986520
ScientificWorldJournal. 2016;2016:3182746
pubmed: 27022618
J Anim Sci. 2007 May;85(5):1285-94
pubmed: 17224460
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Feb 23;107(8):3394-9
pubmed: 20133684
Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2012 Apr;302(7):R795-804
pubmed: 22277936
J Anim Sci. 2018 Mar 6;96(2):375-397
pubmed: 29390120
J Anim Sci. 2013 Aug;91(8):3502-13
pubmed: 23736061
J Anim Sci. 2010 Apr;88(13 Suppl):E51-60
pubmed: 19717774
Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2009 May 25;304(1-2):8-18
pubmed: 19433243
J Anim Sci. 2009 Apr;87(14 Suppl):E64-71
pubmed: 19028857
J Anim Sci. 2008 Jan;86(1):1-16
pubmed: 17785604
Hum Mol Genet. 2009 Nov 1;18(21):4046-53
pubmed: 19656776
J Physiol. 2006 Aug 15;575(Pt 1):241-50
pubmed: 16763001
Diabetologia. 2012 Aug;55(8):2085-8
pubmed: 22643933
J Genomics. 2013 Nov 08;1:29-38
pubmed: 25031653
Physiology (Bethesda). 2006 Feb;21:29-37
pubmed: 16443820
Reprod Fertil Dev. 2011;23(1):64-74
pubmed: 21366982
BMC Genet. 2014 Jan 30;15:14
pubmed: 24476087
J Anim Sci. 2016 Apr;94(4):1342-53
pubmed: 27135994
J Anim Sci. 2007 Oct;85(10):2464-72
pubmed: 17565057
Front Genet. 2015 Sep 28;6:302
pubmed: 26442116
J Anim Sci. 2009 Feb;87(2):729-39
pubmed: 18952720
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2003 Mar;4(3):202-12
pubmed: 12612639
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 12;13(7):e0200466
pubmed: 30001361
BMC Genomics. 2014 Nov 20;15:1004
pubmed: 25410110
Horm Res Paediatr. 2016;85(2):75-82
pubmed: 26812688
J Anim Sci. 2010 Apr;88(13 Suppl):E205-15
pubmed: 19820049
J Anim Sci. 2009 Mar;87(3):1147-55
pubmed: 18997078