| Literature DB >> 21151936 |
Tyler F Daniels1, Xiao-Lin Wu, Zengxiang Pan, Jennifer J Michal, Raymond W Wright, Karen M Killinger, Michael D MacNeil, Zhihua Jiang.
Abstract
In the present study, thirteen genes involved in the reverse cholesterol transport (RCT) pathway were investigated for their associations with three fat depositions, eight fatty acid compositions and two growth-related phenotypes in a Wagyu x Limousin reference population, including 6 F(1) bulls, 113 F(1) dams, and 246 F(2) progeny. A total of 37 amplicons were used to screen single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) on 6 F(1) bulls. Among 36 SNPs detected in 11 of these 13 genes, 19 were selected for genotyping by the Sequenom assay design on all F(2) progeny. Single-marker analysis revealed seven SNPs in ATP binding cassette A1, apolipoproteins A1, B and E, phospholipid transfer protein and paraoxinase 1 genes significantly associated with nine phenotypes (P<0.05). Previously, we reported genetic networks associated with 19 complex phenotypes based on a total of 138 genetic polymorphisms derived from 71 known functional genes. Therefore, after Bonferroni correction, these significant (adjusted P<0.05) and suggestive (adjusted P<0.10) associations were then used to identify genetic networks related to the RCT pathway. Multiple-marker analysis suggested possible genetic networks involving the RCT pathway for kidney-pelvic-heart fat percentage, rib-eye area, and subcutaneous fat depth phenotypes with markers derived from paraoxinase 1, apolipoproteins A1 and E, respectively. The present study confirmed that genes involved in cholesterol homeostasis are useful targets for investigating obesity in humans as well as for improving meat quality phenotypes in a livestock production.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21151936 PMCID: PMC2997077 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015203
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Gene symbols, GenBank references, amplicons and SNPs discovered in the present study.
| Symbol | Reference | Amplicon (5′ – 3′) | SNPs |
| ABCA1 | AAFC03037127 | 8349 (24) – 8843 (24) | |
| 7516 (23) – 8091 (23) | |||
| 26751 (23) – 27342 (24) | 26841G>T, | ||
| AAFC03121742 | 35808 (25) – 36322 (23) | ||
| 42352 (24) – 42889 (24) | |||
| 43271 (24) – 43862 (23) |
| ||
| 45866 (23) – 46465 (23) | |||
| 72807 (23) – 73325 (23) |
| ||
| 90523 (23) – 91201 (23) | |||
| 89455 (23) – 90037 (25) | 89514T>G | ||
| APOA1 | AAFC03114751 | 10221 (23) – 10671 (21) | |
| 10828 (22) – 11413 (23) |
| ||
| 11797 (24) – 12393 (23) |
| ||
| APOB | AAFC03076821 | 24087 (24) – 24606 (24) | 24295C>T |
| 38480 (23) – 39240 (23) | 38827G>A, | ||
| AAFC03076822 | 12217 (24) – 12845 (24) | 12324T>C | |
| APOC2 | AAFC03024850 | 16125 (21) – 16703 (22) | 16569G>A |
| APOE | AAFC03034452 | 11376 (24) – 12059 (23) |
|
| 12364 (23) – 13091 (22) |
| ||
| 15330 (20) – 16125 (24) |
| ||
| LCAT | AAFC03121473 | 36846 (24) – 37346 (24) | 37122G>A |
| LDLR | AAFC03045894 | 25 (24) – 621 (23) | |
| 820 (24) – 1226 (24) | |||
| AAFC03029857 | 25894 (22) – 26449 (23) | ||
| LIPC | AAFC03129603 | 387 (24) – 984 (25) | |
| 1183 (22) – 1685 (23) |
| ||
| LIPG | AAFC03021384 | 7511 (24) – 8149 (24) |
|
| 8189 (23) – 8709 (23) | |||
| LPL | AAFC03023665 | 34677 (26) – 35241 (25) | |
| 36200 (24) – 36832 (24) | |||
| PLTP | AAFC03071797 | 2459 (24) – 2969 (23) | |
| 13354 (23) – 14092 (23) |
| ||
| PON1 | AAFC03037852 | 39031 (24) – 39543 (24) | 39335G>T |
| 64143 (23) – 64692 (24) | 64207C>T, 64241G>A, | ||
| SCARB1 | AAFC03038307 | 17200 (24) – 17666 (23) |
|
| 18769 (22) – 19430 (23) | |||
| AAFC03119800 | 6933 (23) – 7429 (21) |
*Number in brackets is the length of forward or reverse primer for the amplicon.
Figure 1Linkage disequilibrium analysis for markers in the bovine ABCA1, APOE and SCARB1 genes.
Pairwise linkage disequilibrium relationship for these SNPs are based on r2 measurements.
Figure 2Association of SNP markers with fat decomposition and muscle growth.
P values are adjusted by Bonferroni correction. The different capital letters between different genotypes within the same marker means the difference reaches the significance level of adjusted P<0.05, while those with difference between genotypes marked by different lowercase letters is suggestive (adjusted P<0.10). The same letters between genotypes indicate no suggestive/significant difference (adjusted P>0.10). The number within the bars represents the number of animals within each genotype group.
Figure 3Identification of genetic networks related to RCT pathway via Akaiki Information Criterion based model comparison.
A1, B1 and C1 are genetic networks previously reported by Jiang et al. (2009 with permission), while A2, B2 and C2 are newly identified networks in the present study for KPH, REA and SFD, respectively. The x-axis and y-axis represent actual and predicted trait (genotypic) values. The numbers in arrows represent substitution effects of one type of genotypes or allele for another one. In the graph, AIC = computed AIC value for a specific model, say A1, and Δ = the difference of AIC values, say, between model A1 and the base model A0. The AIC values for the three base models, A0, B0 and C0, were −424.15, 132.2, and −653.61, respectively.