Literature DB >> 21198696

Meta-analysis of results from quantitative trait loci mapping studies on pig chromosome 4.

K M Silva1, J W M Bastiaansen, E F Knol, J W M Merks, P S Lopes, S E F Guimarães, J A M van Arendonk.   

Abstract

Meta-analysis of results from multiple studies could lead to more precise quantitative trait loci (QTL) position estimates compared to the individual experiments. As the raw data from many different studies are not readily available, the use of results from published articles may be helpful. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis of QTL on chromosome 4 in pig, using data from 25 separate experiments. First, a meta-analysis was performed for individual traits: average daily gain and backfat thickness. Second, a meta-analysis was performed for the QTL of three traits affecting loin yield: loin eye area, carcass length and loin meat weight. Third, 78 QTL were selected from 20 traits that could be assigned to one of three broad categories: carcass, fatness or growth traits. For each analysis, the number of identified meta-QTL was smaller than the number of initial QTL. The reduction in the number of QTL ranged from 71% to 86% compared to the total number before the meta-analysis. In addition, the meta-analysis reduced the QTL confidence intervals by as much as 85% compared to individual QTL estimates. The reduction in the confidence interval was greater when a large number of independent QTL was included in the meta-analysis. Meta-QTL related to growth and fatness were found in the same region as the FAT1 region. Results indicate that the meta-analysis is an efficient strategy to estimate the number and refine the positions of QTL when QTL estimates are available from multiple populations and experiments. This strategy can be used to better target further studies such as the selection of candidate genes related to trait variation.
© 2010 The Authors, Animal Genetics © 2010 Stichting International Foundation for Animal Genetics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21198696     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2052.2010.02145.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anim Genet        ISSN: 0268-9146            Impact factor:   3.169


  6 in total

1.  Bayesian GWAS and network analysis revealed new candidate genes for number of teats in pigs.

Authors:  L L Verardo; F F Silva; L Varona; M D V Resende; J W M Bastiaansen; P S Lopes; S E F Guimarães
Journal:  J Appl Genet       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Genome-wide linkage analysis of QTL for growth and body composition employing the PorcineSNP60 BeadChip.

Authors:  Ana I Fernández; Dafne Pérez-Montarelo; Carmen Barragán; Yuliaxis Ramayo-Caldas; Noelia Ibáñez-Escriche; Anna Castelló; Jose Luis Noguera; Luis Silió; Josep María Folch; M Carmen Rodríguez
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2012-05-20       Impact factor: 2.797

3.  Meta - and combined - QTL analysis of different experiments on immune traits in chickens.

Authors:  Anna Slawinska; Maria Siwek
Journal:  J Appl Genet       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Regularized quantile regression for SNP marker estimation of pig growth curves.

Authors:  L M A Barroso; M Nascimento; A C C Nascimento; F F Silva; N V L Serão; C D Cruz; M D V Resende; F L Silva; C F Azevedo; P S Lopes; S E F Guimarães
Journal:  J Anim Sci Biotechnol       Date:  2017-07-11

5.  Meta-analysis of genome-wide association from genomic prediction models.

Authors:  Y L Bernal Rubio; J L Gualdrón Duarte; R O Bates; C W Ernst; D Nonneman; G A Rohrer; A King; S D Shackelford; T L Wheeler; R J C Cantet; J P Steibel
Journal:  Anim Genet       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Revealing new candidate genes for reproductive traits in pigs: combining Bayesian GWAS and functional pathways.

Authors:  Lucas L Verardo; Fabyano F Silva; Marcos S Lopes; Ole Madsen; John W M Bastiaansen; Egbert F Knol; Mathew Kelly; Luis Varona; Paulo S Lopes; Simone E F Guimarães
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 4.297

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.