Evaluation of the phenotypic and genomic background of variability based on litter size of Large White pigs.
Journal
Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE
ISSN: 1297-9686
Titre abrégé: Genet Sel Evol
Pays: France
ID NLM: 9114088
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Jan 2022
03 Jan 2022
Historique:
received:
15
07
2021
accepted:
15
12
2021
entrez:
4
1
2022
pubmed:
5
1
2022
medline:
6
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The genetic background of trait variability has captured the interest of ecologists and animal breeders because the genes that control it could be involved in buffering various environmental effects. Phenotypic variability of a given trait can be assessed by studying the heterogeneity of the residual variance, and the quantitative trait loci (QTL) that are involved in the control of this variability are described as variance QTL (vQTL). This study focuses on litter size (total number born, TNB) and its variability in a Large White pig population. The variability of TNB was evaluated either using a simple method, i.e. analysis of the log-transformed variance of residuals (LnVar), or the more complex double hierarchical generalized linear model (DHGLM). We also performed a single-SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) genome-wide association study (GWAS). To our knowledge, this is only the second study that reports vQTL for litter size in pigs and the first one that shows GWAS results when using two methods to evaluate variability of TNB: LnVar and DHGLM. Based on LnVar, three candidate vQTL regions were detected, on Sus scrofa chromosomes (SSC) 1, 7, and 18, which comprised 18 SNPs. Based on the DHGLM, three candidate vQTL regions were detected, i.e. two on SSC7 and one on SSC11, which comprised 32 SNPs. Only one candidate vQTL region overlapped between the two methods, on SSC7, which also contained the most significant SNP. Within this vQTL region, two candidate genes were identified, ADGRF1, which is involved in neurodevelopment of the brain, and ADGRF5, which is involved in the function of the respiratory system and in vascularization. The correlation between estimated breeding values based on the two methods was 0.86. Three-fold cross-validation indicated that DHGLM yielded EBV that were much more accurate and had better prediction of missing observations than LnVar. The results indicated that the LnVar and DHGLM methods resulted in genetically different traits. Based on their validation, we recommend the use of DHGLM over the simpler method of log-transformed variance of residuals. These conclusions can be useful for future studies on the evaluation of the variability of any trait in any species.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The genetic background of trait variability has captured the interest of ecologists and animal breeders because the genes that control it could be involved in buffering various environmental effects. Phenotypic variability of a given trait can be assessed by studying the heterogeneity of the residual variance, and the quantitative trait loci (QTL) that are involved in the control of this variability are described as variance QTL (vQTL). This study focuses on litter size (total number born, TNB) and its variability in a Large White pig population. The variability of TNB was evaluated either using a simple method, i.e. analysis of the log-transformed variance of residuals (LnVar), or the more complex double hierarchical generalized linear model (DHGLM). We also performed a single-SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) genome-wide association study (GWAS). To our knowledge, this is only the second study that reports vQTL for litter size in pigs and the first one that shows GWAS results when using two methods to evaluate variability of TNB: LnVar and DHGLM.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Based on LnVar, three candidate vQTL regions were detected, on Sus scrofa chromosomes (SSC) 1, 7, and 18, which comprised 18 SNPs. Based on the DHGLM, three candidate vQTL regions were detected, i.e. two on SSC7 and one on SSC11, which comprised 32 SNPs. Only one candidate vQTL region overlapped between the two methods, on SSC7, which also contained the most significant SNP. Within this vQTL region, two candidate genes were identified, ADGRF1, which is involved in neurodevelopment of the brain, and ADGRF5, which is involved in the function of the respiratory system and in vascularization. The correlation between estimated breeding values based on the two methods was 0.86. Three-fold cross-validation indicated that DHGLM yielded EBV that were much more accurate and had better prediction of missing observations than LnVar.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The results indicated that the LnVar and DHGLM methods resulted in genetically different traits. Based on their validation, we recommend the use of DHGLM over the simpler method of log-transformed variance of residuals. These conclusions can be useful for future studies on the evaluation of the variability of any trait in any species.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34979897
doi: 10.1186/s12711-021-00692-5
pii: 10.1186/s12711-021-00692-5
pmc: PMC8722267
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1Subventions
Organisme : narodowe centrum nauki
ID : 2016/23/D/NZ9/00029
Organisme : ministerstwo nauki i szkolnictwa wyższego
ID : 1021/STYP/12/2017
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Anim Genet. 2012 Jul;43 Suppl 1:87-96
pubmed: 22742506
PLoS Genet. 2010 Jun 17;6(6):e1000981
pubmed: 20585554
Nat Commun. 2016 Oct 19;7:13123
pubmed: 27759003
Am J Hum Genet. 2011 Jan 7;88(1):76-82
pubmed: 21167468
BMC Genet. 2012 Jul 24;13:63
pubmed: 22827487
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 May 26;112(21):6706-11
pubmed: 25953335
Nature. 2002 Jun 6;417(6889):618-24
pubmed: 12050657
Angiogenesis. 2019 Nov;22(4):491-505
pubmed: 31256320
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 14;12(8):e0183166
pubmed: 28806758
Animal. 2008 Jan;2(1):19-26
pubmed: 22444959
PLoS Genet. 2011 Sep;7(9):e1002295
pubmed: 21980300
Hum Mol Genet. 2018 Mar 1;27(5):799-810
pubmed: 29325024
BMC Genomics. 2020 May 7;21(1):344
pubmed: 32380955
Genet Sel Evol. 2010 Mar 19;42:8
pubmed: 20302616
Curr Protoc Bioinformatics. 2016 Jun 20;54:1.30.1-1.30.33
pubmed: 27322403
Genet Res (Camb). 2012 Dec;94(6):307-17
pubmed: 23374241
PLoS One. 2013 Nov 04;8(11):e79507
pubmed: 24223957
Front Genet. 2019 Dec 13;10:1216
pubmed: 31921285
PLoS Genet. 2012;8(5):e1002697
pubmed: 22654668
Mol Aspects Med. 2018 Dec;64:34-44
pubmed: 29572109
J Anim Breed Genet. 2020 Nov;137(6):559-570
pubmed: 31943440
BMC Genomics. 2014 Jun 30;15:542
pubmed: 24981054
PLoS One. 2007 Jul 25;2(7):e648
pubmed: 17653275
Genet Res. 2003 Dec;82(3):207-22
pubmed: 15134199
J Anim Sci. 2015 Apr;93(4):1471-80
pubmed: 26020168
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Oct 15;99(21):13642-6
pubmed: 12370436
Front Genet. 2017 Nov 28;8:194
pubmed: 29234349
J Proteome Res. 2013 Sep 6;12(9):3920-33
pubmed: 23848590
J Anim Sci. 2017 Apr;95(4):1425-1433
pubmed: 28464101
Respir Res. 2019 Jan 17;20(1):11
pubmed: 30654796
Nat Genet. 2014 Feb;46(2):100-6
pubmed: 24473328
Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2013 Aug;24(4):752-9
pubmed: 23566377
Br Poult Sci. 2019 Aug;60(4):366-372
pubmed: 31046426
Anim Genet. 2013 Aug;44(4):387-97
pubmed: 23437861
Genet Res (Camb). 2010 Dec;92(5-6):381-95
pubmed: 21429270
Genetics. 2012 Jul;191(3):1003-13
pubmed: 22554889
Anim Genet. 2012 Feb;43(1):18-26
pubmed: 22221021
Genetics. 2011 Jun;188(2):435-47
pubmed: 21467569
Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 2007 Sep-Oct;42(5):355-72
pubmed: 17917872
BMC Genet. 2016 Jan 27;17 Suppl 1:15
pubmed: 26822294
Plant Genome. 2020 Mar;13(1):e20011
pubmed: 33016629
BMC Genomics. 2018 Aug 16;19(1):619
pubmed: 30115034
Genet Sel Evol. 2013 Oct 17;45:41
pubmed: 24134557
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31825
pubmed: 22393372
Genet Sel Evol. 2001 May-Jun;33(3):249-71
pubmed: 11403747
J Anim Breed Genet. 2019 Mar;136(2):134-148
pubmed: 30585650
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005 Jul 29;360(1459):1513-27
pubmed: 16108138
Am J Hum Genet. 2016 Dec 1;99(6):1368-1376
pubmed: 27889060
BMC Genomics. 2014 Jun 17;15:478
pubmed: 24935670
Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Oct;1(10):757-765
pubmed: 29051922
PLoS Genet. 2012;8(8):e1002839
pubmed: 22876191
Genet Sel Evol. 2009 Dec 31;41:55
pubmed: 20043827
Am J Hum Genet. 2007 Sep;81(3):559-75
pubmed: 17701901
Genet Res (Camb). 2008 Oct;90(5):385-95
pubmed: 19061529
Evolution. 2016 Sep;70(9):2004-16
pubmed: 27435892
J Anim Sci. 2014 Jul;92(7):2846-60
pubmed: 24962532
J Dairy Sci. 2013;96(11):7306-7317
pubmed: 24035025
Front Genet. 2019 Jan 14;9:692
pubmed: 30693014
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2018 Dec 9;507(1-4):389-394
pubmed: 30448058
J Anim Sci. 2015 Mar;93(3):900-11
pubmed: 26020868
Trends Ecol Evol. 2020 Jan;35(1):22-33
pubmed: 31519463
Genetics. 2004 Dec;168(4):2089-97
pubmed: 15611178
J Anim Sci. 2019 Mar 1;97(3):1133-1142
pubmed: 30715382
Nature. 2012 Oct 11;490(7419):267-72
pubmed: 22982992
BMC Genomics. 2015 Dec 09;16:1049
pubmed: 26652161
J Anim Sci. 2012 Jan;90(1):37-44
pubmed: 21948608