Literature DB >> 22497286

Genome-wide association analysis for quantitative trait loci influencing Warner-Bratzler shear force in five taurine cattle breeds.

M C McClure1, H R Ramey, M M Rolf, S D McKay, J E Decker, R H Chapple, J W Kim, T M Taxis, R L Weaber, R D Schnabel, J F Taylor.   

Abstract

We performed a genome-wide association study for Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBSF), a measure of meat tenderness, by genotyping 3360 animals from five breeds with 54 790 BovineSNP50 and 96 putative single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within μ-calpain [HUGO nomenclature calpain 1, (mu/I) large subunit; CAPN1] and calpastatin (CAST). Within- and across-breed analyses estimated SNP allele substitution effects (ASEs) by genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and variance components by restricted maximum likelihood under an animal model incorporating a genomic relationship matrix. GBLUP estimates of ASEs from the across-breed analysis were moderately correlated (0.31-0.66) with those from the individual within-breed analyses, indicating that prediction equations for molecular estimates of breeding value developed from across-breed analyses should be effective for genomic selection within breeds. We identified 79 genomic regions associated with WBSF in at least three breeds, but only eight were detected in all five breeds, suggesting that the within-breed analyses were underpowered, that different quantitative trait loci (QTL) underlie variation between breeds or that the BovineSNP50 SNP density is insufficient to detect common QTL among breeds. In the across-breed analysis, CAPN1 was followed by CAST as the most strongly associated WBSF QTL genome-wide, and associations with both were detected in all five breeds. We show that none of the four commercialized CAST and CAPN1 SNP diagnostics are causal for associations with WBSF, and we putatively fine-map the CAPN1 causal mutation to a 4581-bp region. We estimate that variation in CAST and CAPN1 explains 1.02 and 1.85% of the phenotypic variation in WBSF respectively.
© 2012 The Authors, Animal Genetics © 2012 Stichting International Foundation for Animal Genetics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22497286      PMCID: PMC3506923          DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2052.2012.02323.x

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


Introduction

Consumer assessment of beef quality, palatability and overall eating satisfaction is significantly influenced by tenderness (Huffman ; Weston ; Moser ; Smith ), and consumers have indicated a willingness to pay a premium for ‘guaranteed tender' steak (Boleman ; Mintert ; Miller ; Platter ). Inadequate tenderness has consistently been identified in National Beef Quality Audits as a priority quality challenge (Lorenzen ; Roeber ; Shook ) because consumers consider tenderness to be the single most important component of meat quality and will substitute protein sources motivated by their dissatisfaction from the purchase of a tough cut (Miller ; McKenna ). To address these concerns, researchers have identified quantitative trait loci (QTL) for Warner–Bratzler shear force (WBSF) measurements on the longissimus dorsi muscle on chromosomes 2, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 15, 20, 25 and 29 (Casas , 2000, 2001, 2003; Keele ; Rexroad ; Alexander ; Davis ; Gutierrez-Gil ; Gill , 2010). However, from these reported QTL, DNA marker tests have been developed and commercialized only from calpastatin (CAST) on chromosome 7 and calpain 1, (mu/I) large subunit (CAPN1) on chromosome 29 (Page , 2004; White ; Casas ; Van Eenennaam ). While these commercialized marker tests are predictive of tenderness in both Bos taurus taurus and B. t. indicus breeds, it appears that they are not causal for the detected associations with tenderness (Casas ). However, the estimated genotypic associations estimated for these markers are large, with an average difference of 0.15 kg in WBSF between alternate homozygotes in independent studies involving several breeds (Casas ; Morris ; Van Eenennaam ; Johnston & Graser 2010). While positional candidate genes on other chromosomes have been investigated (Rexroad ; Stone ), none have resulted in commercial tests. To assist beef breeders to make efficient and large changes in tenderness, DNA assays must be developed that can reliably predict the genetic variation in tenderness without regard to the breed composition of an animal. To address this need, we genotyped 3360 animals representing 114 half-sib families produced by the American Angus Association (AAA), American Hereford Association (AHA), American Simmental Association (ASA), American International Charolais Association (AICA) and the North American Limousin Foundation (NALF) as part of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) sponsored Carcass Merit Project (CMP) to develop prediction equations for the implementation of genomic selection (Meuwissen ) and to identify genomic regions associated with tenderness. This study reports genomic regions detected as being concordant across breeds, which putatively harbour candidate genes that influence tenderness and which could be targeted for the development of diagnostic assays. We also dissect variation within CAST and CAPN1 in order to identify the genomic regions most likely to harbour the causal variants influencing beef tenderness.

Materials and methods

Animals and phenotype

A total of 3360 animals representing five of the breed associations participating in the NCBA-sponsored CMP were selected for genotyping based on the availability of WBSF data and DNA samples (Table 1). The design of the CMP project has previously been described by Minick ); however, only the Angus and Hereford samples represent purebred populations, with the Continental breeds being represented by crossbred progeny, with Simmental, Charolais and Limousin sires mated to predominantly commercial Angus cows. Meat tenderness was measured as WBSF (kg) of longissimus dorsi steaks at day 14 post-mortem as previously described (Wheeler ; Minick ). Muscle samples, extracted DNA samples and carcass phenotypes produced in the CMP and owned by the AAA, AHA, ASA, AICA and NALF were transferred to the University of Missouri. All CMP animals had blood samples drawn at weaning, from which DNA was extracted and tested to validate the identity of their sires. Additionally, a muscle sample was taken at slaughter at the capture of phenotype data on most of the animals, and DNA extracted from a subset of the muscle samples was previously genotyped and compared with the genotype profiles produced from the corresponding blood samples to validate the identity of each carcass. This process identified that about 10% of animals or carcasses were misidentified (Thallman ) likely due to changes in the order of carcasses because of ‘rail-outs' at packing plants. To resolve this issue, we extracted genomic DNA from 2940 muscle samples taken from the phenotyped carcasses by proteinase K digestion followed by phenolchloroform–isoamyl alcohol extraction and ethanol precipitation (Sambrook ). The remaining 420 DNA samples were extracted from the blood, but these samples had previously been DNA-typed and successfully matched to the sample taken at harvest.
Table 1

Animal counts, mean phenotype and estimates of additive genetic variance and heritability by breed.

BreedCountWarner–Bratzler shear force (kg)
Animals1SiresAverage σA2 h2
Angus660 (651)203.740.220.52
Charolais702 (695)184.410.230.46
Hereford1192 (1095)294.750.150.17
Limousin285 (283)234.280.070.09
Simmental521 (516)244.360.060.08
All Breeds3360 (3240)1144.370.170.25

Numbers of animals with genotype call rate ≥0.85 in parentheses.

Animal counts, mean phenotype and estimates of additive genetic variance and heritability by breed. Numbers of animals with genotype call rate ≥0.85 in parentheses.

Genotypes

All samples were genotyped using the Illumina BovineSNP50 BeadArray (Matukumalli ) for 54 790 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and a custom-designed Illumina GoldenGate assay incorporating 96 putative SNPs located within 186 kb of CAST and CAPN1 (White ; Casas ). Several of the putative SNPs identified in the genome sequencing project were not variable (Table S1), and we were much more successful in fine-mapping CAPN1 than CAST. All genotypes were called in the Illumina genomestudio software. Genotypes were filtered according to their unique localization to an autosome or the X chromosome in the University of Maryland sequence assembly (UMD3.0; Zimin ), call rate (>0.89) and minor allele frequency >0.01 within each breed. Animals were excluded if their individual genotype call rate was <0.85. The call rate of >0.89 for SNP filtering was used to ensure that all commercialized tenderness SNPs were included in the analysis. After filtering, the data set comprised 40 645 SNPs assayed in 3240 animals (Tables 1 Table S1), discovered either as part of the bovine genome sequencing project or through directed CAPN1 resequencing studies at the US Meat Animal Research Center at Clay Center, NE (Page et al. and S2).

Analysis

fastphase v1.2.3 (Scheet & Stephens 2006) was used with UMD3.0 coordinates to phase all genotypes and impute the 0.89% of missing genotypes. The complete set of genotypes was then used to generate a genomic relationship matrix (G) across all breeds using the first of the methods described by VanRaden (2008) with a modification allowing the inclusion of X-linked loci as described below. Warner–Bratzler shear force phenotypes were analysed under a single-trait mixed linear animal model in which the genomic relationship matrix was used to represent the realized identity by descent among the animals. The model fit was y = Xβ + Zu + e where y is a vector of WBSF measurements, β is a vector of fixed contemporary group effects defined as breed × herd of origin × sex of calf × slaughter date, u is a vector of random additive genetic merits, and e is a vector of random residuals. The matrices X and Z are incidence matrices relating observations to levels of the fixed and random effects, and we assume that and Cov (u,e) = 0. Restricted maximum likelihood was used to estimate the variance components and and iteration on the variance component estimates continued until the estimate of heritability had converged to four significant figures. At convergence, the GBLUP of the vector of SNP allele substitution effects (ASEs) was obtained as where p is the frequency of the A allele at the ith SNP (genotypes at each SNP are called in A/B space by the GenomeStudio software), q = 1 – p, elements of the ith column of M are 2q, q − p and −2p for AA, AB and BB genotypes at autosomal and pseudoautosomal loci (VanRaden 2008) and are q and –p for AY and BY genotypes at X-linked loci in males, and is GBLUP of u. Analyses were performed both within each breed and across all breeds. The variance component associated with SNP ASEs is , and for each SNP, the predicted ASE was normalized to a t-like statistic as t = |α|/σ. These values are included in Table S2 and are shown in the Manhattan plots in Figs 1 and S1.
Figure 1

Manhattan plot of single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) allele substitution effects estimated in the across-breed analysis and normalized by the square root of the estimated SNP variance component.

Manhattan plot of single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) allele substitution effects estimated in the across-breed analysis and normalized by the square root of the estimated SNP variance component.

Across-breed comparison of putative QTL regions

To determine whether common QTL influence WBSF across breeds, we ranked the t values estimated in the within- and across-breed analyses and then identified SNPs for which the t values ranked in the top 500 (1.2%) of SNP ASEs in the across-breed analysis. For each of the regions tagged by these SNPs, we declared the region to harbour a QTL if at least three SNPs from different within-breed analyses had ASEs ranked in the top 500. While linkage disequilibrium (LD) decays to ∼0.1 within less than a 500-kb distance within breeds of distantly related individuals (McKay ), many of the individuals incorporated into these analyses are half-sibs (Table 1), which leads to a much greater extent of LD because of large common chromosomal segments transmitted by the sires to their progeny. Additionally, we wanted to allow for the possibility that more than one QTL could be present within any one genomic region. Accordingly, we allowed the region size to vary up to 5.7 Mb (average 1.7 Mb) as determined by the signatures of the detected within-breed SNP ASE ranks. Furthermore, within each region, we did not expect to find the same SNP to be most strongly associated with WBSF, because differences in SNP and QTL allele frequencies between breeds (Table S2) can lead to different patterns of LD in different breeds.

Candidate genes

Genomic regions identified as being associated with WBSF in at least four breeds were analysed using the NCBI Entrez Map Viewer (accessed 07/06/2011) to identify potential candidate genes for tenderness.

CAST and CAPN1

A 1.48-Mb region of BTA7 harbouring 28 SNPs spanning CAST and a 2.64-Mb region of BTA29 harbouring 93 SNPs spanning CAPN1 were found to contain loci for which SNP ASEs ranked in the top 500 in the within-breed analyses. To allow haplotype-based analyses, we expanded the regions to 44 SNPs spanning 2.86 Mb for CAST and 100 SNPs spanning 3.12 Mb for CAPN1 (Table S3). We first analysed each SNP individually by including allele effects (the difference between the two estimated allele effects is the ASE for the SNP) in β, in addition to the contemporary group effects, and then we included haplotype effects for windows of nine contiguous SNPs using phase information estimated by fastphase. The haplotype model was sequentially fit by sliding the nine SNP window through each region one SNP at a time, and the statistics computed for each window were assigned to the 5th SNP located at the centre of each window. In both cases, the analysis was performed using the previously estimated variance components (Table 1), and F-tests for SNP or haplotype effects were constructed from the difference between model sums of squares including and excluding the fitted SNP or haplotype effects, the difference in number of parameters between the fitted models and the estimated residual variance for the full model. Because the number of detected haplotypes varied throughout each region (Table S3), the window producing the largest model sum of squares does not necessarily result in the largest F-statistic or −log10P-value (because the numerator mean square can be significantly influenced when its degrees of freedom are small but vary between tests). To avoid this, we computed the percentage of phenotypic variation explained by each window through the region from the ratio of the window to phenotypic sums of squares, where the window sum of squares was estimated as the difference between model sum of squares including and excluding haplotype effects for the nine SNP window and the phenotypic sum of squares was estimated as the total sum of squares corrected for the mean and contemporary group sums of squares. This statistic identifies the SNP window that explains the largest amount of variation in WBSF regardless of the number of haplotypes that are fit.

Results and discussion

We found large differences in the heritabilities of WBSF across the five breeds (Table 1) and were concerned that this might reflect differences in data quality or the correct assignment of phenotype to genotype because of the sample misidentification issue identified within the CMP. However, we also estimated heritabilities for eight additional carcass traits recorded in this project (data not shown) and found no evidence for systematically lower heritabilities within any of the breeds. We therefore conclude that the re-extraction of DNA from tissue samples taken from the carcass at slaughter effectively solved the misidentification problem. Thus, the variation in heritabilities probably reflects the relatively small sample size within each breed and the sampling of the bulls used to produce these animals. However, the effect of variation in heritability across breeds was to substantially influence the ‘genetic' sample size which we estimate as N × h, the number of phenotypes multiplied by the square root of the heritability, which is an estimate of the cumulative amount of additive genetic information in a sample of N unrelated individuals and was 468.3, 451.5, 471.7, 85.4 and 143.5 in Angus, Hereford, Charolais, Limousin and Simmental respectively. In the across-breed analysis, the use of the genomic relationship matrix corrects for the stratification because of pedigree relatedness while accounting for the extent of background relatedness among the Angus and Continental breed groups because of the use of Angus dams to produce the crossbred Continental breed calves. In this analysis, the associations between the CAST and CAPN1 loci with WBSF were the largest in the genome (Fig. 1), reflecting both the magnitude of effects of these genes and the increased SNP density within these regions, which improves the likelihood of finding SNP in strong LD with the causal mutations. The within-breed analyses identified CAPN1 as the locus most strongly associated with WBSF genome-wide, although the highest ranked SNP ASE within this region for Limousin was only 30th (Table S2), presumably reflecting the very small sample size for this breed. On the other hand, the CAST associations were more variable among the breeds, being the most strongly associated with WBSF genome-wide in Hereford, ranking highly in Charolais and Limousin, but only 234th and 208th in Angus and Simmental respectively. These results are likely due to the fairly small sample sizes for the analysed breeds, but probably also may reflect the different SNP densities within the two regions and differences in allele frequencies at the SNPs and QTL across breeds. We accomplished a much higher SNP density in the region harbouring CAPN1 than CAST, and this suggests that we had insufficient SNPs to find at least one that was in strong LD with the causal mutations within CAST in all breeds. Across all 40 645 SNPs, the correlations between ASEs estimated within each of the breeds varied from −0.02 to 0.04, indicating that models developed to predict genomic breeding values within one breed will have very low accuracies in other breeds. This has previously been predicted using simulated data (de Roos ; Toosi ) but, despite the use of commercial Angus females to produce the Continental breed crossbred steers, it is a consequence of the genetic distance between the training and validation sets of animals. Habier ) demonstrated that the number of generations that separate the training and validation data sets influences the accuracy of genomic breeding values estimated in the validation set, with lower accuracies occurring when this relationship is more distant. On the other hand, the correlations between the ASEs estimated in the across-breed analysis and those estimated in the within-breed analyses were 0.37, 0.66, 0.41, 0.31 and 0.42 for Angus, Hereford, Charolais, Limousin and Simmental respectively. This result supports the simulation results of Toosi ), who showed that training in admixed populations results in genomic estimates of breeding value with accuracies almost equivalent to those achieved from training and validating within the same breed. Of course, the key benefits from the perspective of beef cattle breeding are that training population samples can dramatically be increased by pooling breeds and that the resulting genomic breeding values have industry-wide utility. Hayes & Goddard (2001) have estimated that between 50 and 100 QTL underlie variation in quantitative traits within livestock populations. While under neutral theory, the common QTL mutations that are detectable by GWA analysis must predate the domestication of cattle (Kimura & Ohta 1973), the relatively small populations upon which breeds were founded may have led to the sampling of different subsets of QTL within different breeds. In fact, the extent to which breeds share common QTL is unknown (Pryce ), but is of some importance to the development of prediction equations for molecular estimates of breeding value in admixed populations and the development and utilization of genotyping assays for the prediction of genetic merit within the beef industry. To identify QTL underlying variation in WBSF, we examined the genomic regions harbouring the 500 SNPs with the largest ASEs from the across-breed analysis for SNPs with ASEs ranked in the top 500 in the within-breed analyses for at least three of the breeds. We identified 79 genomic regions that putatively harbour QTL influencing WBSF (Table table by GWA analysis must predate the domestication of cattle (Kimura & Ohta). Of these, 42 were identified in three breeds, 29 in four breeds and eight in all five breeds. There was no difference between the breeds (P= 0.48) or between British and Continental breeds (P= 0.52) in the probability of QTL detection for all 79 QTL or for the 42 QTL identified in only three breeds (P = 0.35 and 0.82 respectively). Clearly sample size, assay SNP density, constraints on SNP ranks and the size of regions harbouring highly ranked SNP ASEs all impact the identification of putatively common QTL. Of the 113 instances when the within-breed estimated SNP ASEs ranked >500, the average rank was only 2551, suggesting that the majority of these regions harbour QTL that segregate in all breeds. Changing the minimum within-breed ASE rank criterion to <1000 resulted in 17 of these QTL being detected in all five breeds, 41 in four breeds and 21 in three breeds (Table 2). Thus, there appears to be little phylogenetic signal in these data, and if a QTL was detected in only three breeds, these breeds were as likely to be British and Continental as strictly Continental.
Table 2

Genomic regions identified as harbouring QTL that were detected in at least three breeds.

BTAStart1End1SNP2Location3No. SNP4BreedsAngus4Hereford4Charolais4Limousin4Simmental4All breeds4
127 034 49029 073 969rs4240919528 111 48730 (2)C, L, S743363333718919335
1155 725 361156 105 357rs41600022155 725 3618 (1)H, L, S224243967429267423
3306 3221 267 869ss863013481 267 86917 (1)A, H, C15413422265843319210
462 189 08562 766 260rs4340345862 685 65016 (2)H, C, S2695244292167917660
54 501 9325 240 327ss86306901*5 012 50515 (1)A, H, S9042288273688453458
521 876 60623 103 768rs2901477921 876 60619 (1)C, L, S846300251441181444
599 077 991101 271 357rs41654473101 271 35724 (1)C, L, S1105126983280270319
620 730 69022 576 164rs4275625821 884 44636 (2)A, C, L, S10246719130478190
6102 116 041104 245 701ss117968229103 281 88444 (3)A, L, S21462514639448273
755 116 28957 554 684rs2901217455 116 28936 (1)A, H, L, S6513272710526247
773 155 94474 367 220ss8631855474 367 22028 (1)A, H, C, L3581024701443570288
777 854 69683 621 039rs4352738680 731 48889 (3)H, C, L, S14789442021942471
797 861 34198 820 742rs41255587*98 579 57419 (8)A, H, C, L, S2371143730810
7106 927 241108 205 624rs43531510106 927 24124 (2)H, C, S86681634997230698
83 830 2804 955 143rs416180194 955 14319 (1)A, H, S137575349307189296
843 890 71446 946 557rs4231241943 890 71448 (1)H, C, L, S35612081641012631
865 338 17769 622 989ss11796925368 894 73568 (4)A, H, C, L, S156851982409029
897 684 07498 861 495ss8631921998 746 33116 (1)A, H, C, L311812381414390184
8112 287 843113 301 368ss86338099112 824 69428 (2)A, C, L, S761615123369235330
936 960 36440 088 647rs4162321638 252 61841 (2)H, L, S12244101033126151188
106 871 2098 514 821ss863176167 830 00326 (1)A, L, S2992813357823899338
1015 413 58916 985 300ss8631795716 326 84834 (1)A, H, L, S3831284565486451113
1029 278 08631 692 125ss8630567929 278 08629 (1)A, H, L, S162184896449293161
1038 799 89140 135 969rs4241233339 278 37418 (4)A, H, S22212045361974336211
1096 842 35898 541 920rs4159085497 410 79626 (1)A, H, L239415777113764262
10102 286 251103 234 411rs41596899102 308 12225 (3)H, C, L, S3577393184103103160
111 214 8561 963 074ss863246311 214 86521 (1)H, C, L, S10476235469173107124
1131 734 78233 348 373rs4160613732 224 66126 (3)A, L, S28816521054336168241
1235 454 03736 764 448ss11797065635 581 41620 (3)H, C, S3094504894969211149
1250 715 27852 618 243rs4369956752 573 53840 (1)A, H, C, L, S41628838535227498
133 723 5315 128 166rs428620244 308 88922 (2)A, H, S10738130332879341305
1329 072 16333 201 457rs2901115831 826 40964 (2)A, H, C, L, S31524231364151
1366 080 03569 702 161rs4163156366 080 03572 (14)A, H, C, S47186178714297
1373 369 21073 746 516ss8633890273 746 5169 (1)A, H, S3441275942950130283
1375 018 15776 078 033ss8628931876 042 83924 (2)A, C, S4177365176711043
1380 848 03281 665 695rs4263043381 029 78721 (3)A, H, C, L386486941500475
1418 732 66020 347 849rs4163333318 756 02532 (5)A, H, C29341487573216076
1447 926 52448 572 837ss8629978448 184 96713 (1)C, L, S2191871301195109302
1462 549 67463 827 753ss8629772663 213 43824 (1)A, H, C, L352301972751445166
1531 599 94233 310 389ss8629181732 861 62132 (4)A, H, L311311527243553162
1534 682 61736 817 688rs41757680*35 661 18640 (1)A, H, C, L, S99215332468354
1548 688 11150 222 093rs4158270548 936 67910 (1)C, L, S47185799172162124119
1562 309 98663 517 557rs4162112563 253 45420 (1)H, C, L911277109444353874
1564 876 84066 717 899ss8631434864 876 84015 (1)H, C, L, S11374220849232
1581 655 31782 875 229ss8629641782 768 39825 (1)H, C, L626152801221842178
1611 797 91513 358 683rs4162317512 130 58923 (2)A, H, C, L18184272114544
1617 070 34519 313 882ss8629023618 059 64919 (1)A, C, L, S334201725638196353
1622 147 46823 830 920ss8632990722 406 46717 (1)A, H, C4018835414521920216
1625 000 15328 384 914ss8629149027 629 56639 (4)H, C, L, S10891661923437148
1671 968 73472 962 506rs4182408172 165 89720 (2)H, C, L693726546755235325
1734 429 94737 201424rs4162629934 429 94725 (1)H, C, L, S1866131391420479195
1763 049 15464 637 527ss8631752263 049 15429 (1)A, C, L, S2051220347454391278
1773 315 12074 393 620ss8633994673 315 12027 (1)A, C, S166551361510522403
184 723 9116 440 525ss863365384 723 91132 (1)A, L, S333580312515125183
1855 028 13955 621 823ss8631012355 590 14410 (1)A, H, S3634185999235328489
2015 870 89717 710 059rs4193310317 175 07135 (3)H, C, L18924452320100936
2064 002 00666 587 451ss86335963*66 105 42451 (2)A, C, L, S142831273295261206
2133 764 43034 810 865rs2901514634 165 84719 (1)A, H, S3783972032924322434
2140 955 78343 096 903rs4250305640 955 78330 (1)A, H, S1163504015296111385
2159 665 71061 121 046rs4158524561 121 04622 (3)A, C, L458703211205179067
2168 152 35668 965 986ss8631284968 846 42917 (4)H, C, L212210820983179633
2348 537 01949 094 579rs4161791148 856 08116 (1)A, C, L8924613324482831329
251 160 3782 105 645ss1179735801 919 60621 (2)A, L, S21516332777387478116
2514 683 15115 752 362ss8633645315 752 36223 92)A, C, L, S96194030660145132
2519 762 71222 728 704rs4157236621 655 45247 (2)A, H, C, L, S97634953258102
2527 545 74530 572 524ss86283327*29 485 85148 (2)A, H, C, L, S57499991026849
2612 580 31114 127 433ss8627348913 293 85627 (1)A, H, S271074581641461144
2617 058 84318 288 540ss8628743918 288 54025 (2)A, H, L, S24340451293212138
2629 698 22131 348 288rs4164689730 903 99837 (1)A, H, C, S4207631789718363
2641 183 63443 312 255ss8628295442 274 09737 (2)H, L, S394723701256445388
273 343 9366 388 642rs290246213 909 80624 (1)A, H, L, S275802437412201401
2719 195 73421 993 669rs4211887819 195 73439 (4)H, L, S23233235381924235
2734 978 04136 054 950ss8631027735 372 60021 (1)A, H, C, S3044251491423222364
284 837 3875 876 902rs416127295 052 47624 (3)H, C, L, S1466317438117233280
2831 700 00434 066 383ss8633710033 570 35233 (1)A, H, L, S39138380070719
2837 398 48838 314 983rs2901396637 514 64320 (1)H, C, S62432011091645084
2843 815 60744 961 253ss8628336244 694 57825 (1)A, C, S15383412169684389
2934 618 65336 573 929rs2902215435 387 11535 (2)A, C, L, S12022582763587129
2944 042 36344 087 629rs42192103*44 070 71330 (18)A, H, C, L, S1413011

A, Angus; C, Charolais; H, Hereford; L, Limousin; S, Simmental; QTL, quantitative trait loci; SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism.

UMD3.0 coordinates for the SNPs defining the boundaries of the SNP putatively harbouring the QTL.

Identity and UMD3.0 coordinate of the most strongly associated SNP within the interval as determined in the across-breed analysis. QTL previously reported in the Cow QTL Database (http://www.animalgenome.org/cgi-bin/QTLdb/BT/draw_traitmap?trait_ID=1030) are indicated with asterisks.

Number of SNPs within the interval. Number of SNPs within the region ranked in top 500 ASEs in the across-breed analysis in parentheses.

Lowest rank for t value within the interval.

Genomic regions identified as harbouring QTL that were detected in at least three breeds. A, Angus; C, Charolais; H, Hereford; L, Limousin; S, Simmental; QTL, quantitative trait loci; SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism. UMD3.0 coordinates for the SNPs defining the boundaries of the SNP putatively harbouring the QTL. Identity and UMD3.0 coordinate of the most strongly associated SNP within the interval as determined in the across-breed analysis. QTL previously reported in the Cow QTL Database (http://www.animalgenome.org/cgi-bin/QTLdb/BT/draw_traitmap?trait_ID=1030) are indicated with asterisks. Number of SNPs within the interval. Number of SNPs within the region ranked in top 500 ASEs in the across-breed analysis in parentheses. Lowest rank for t value within the interval. We have previously found poor concordance between GWA and half-sib linkage analyses for large-effect QTL underlying growth traits, even when large numbers (>50) of families with family sizes ranging from 20 to 224 half-sibs are analysed (data not shown). Assuming that GWA analysis detects common variants, we would expect a significant number of sires to be both heterozygous and detected to be segregating for a large-effect QTL; however, this largely depends on the underlying genetic architecture of the trait. Reed ) found that growth was affected in 34% of viable mouse knockouts, suggesting that natural variation in thousands of genes underlies variation in growth. As a consequence of this complex genetic architecture, there may be a large number of QTL on each chromosome, and the allelic combinations present at these QTL in the sire will impact on whether any one QTL is detected in linkage analyses. Thus, common variants detected in GWA analysis may not be detected in segregation analysis, and rare variants detected in segregation analysis may not be detected in GWA analysis. Nevertheless, we found six of the 12 previously reported meat tenderness QTL, including CAST and CAPN1, to coincide with the QTL identified in this study (Table 2) (Cattle QTL database, http://www.animalgenome.org/cgi-bin/QTLdb/BT/draw_traitmap?trait_ID=1030, accessed June 27, 2011). Notwithstanding the poor resolution of QTL location mapped by linkage analysis, we also found support for all of the other previously identified QTL. For example, in the across-breed analysis, QTL were identified with ASE ranks <500 at 3 151 989 bp and at 6 831 955–7 086 105 bp (300 kb from MSTN) on BTA2. The first was supported by ASE ranks <500 for Angus and Charolais, but an ASE rank of 565 in Limousin. The second was supported by an ASE rank <500 in Charolais and ASE ranks <1000 in Angus, Limousin and Simmental. Thus, despite their proximity, these QTL are likely distinct, and the concordance between our and previously published results suggests that the genetic architecture of meat tenderness is substantially less complex than for growth. We examined the genomic regions harbouring the 37 QTL that were detected in at least four of the breeds for potential candidate genes underlying meat tenderness. Very little is known about the genetic regulation of meat tenderness, and few candidate genes are suggested for these QTL. While CAST and CAPN1 have consistently been identified and analysed as candidate genes for the BTA7 97 861 341–98 820 742-bp and BTA29 44 042 363–44 087 629-bp QTL, respectively, no causal variants have been identified in either gene. CAPN1 encodes the protease μ-calpain, which has been implicated in the proteolysis of muscle proteins during meat ageing (Smith ), and CAST encodes calpastatin, which is an inhibitor of μ-calpain (Goll ). Myogenic determination factor 1 is a transcription factor encoded by MYOD1 and is expressed in skeletal muscle during myogenesis and regeneration. Variation in MYOD1 has been suggested to affect its ability to influence the expression of muscle structural components (Rexroad ), making it a candidate for the QTL at 34 682 617–36 817 688 bp on BTA15. Calpain-2 (m/II) large subunit (m-calpain) is a calcium-activated neutral protease encoded by CAPN2 on BTA16 (25 000 153–28 384 914 bp). M-calpain activity has been associated with both meat tenderness and palatability measurements (Riley ). Fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2) is an upstream regulator of heat shock protein B1 (HSPB1), which has been found to be negatively related to WBSF (Kim ), making it a candidate for the 34 429 947–37 201 424-bp QTL on BTA17. GSN encodes gelsolin, a calcium-regulated protein that functions in both the assembly and disassembly of actin filaments, which are a component of the contractile apparatus in muscle cells and may underlie the BTA8 112 287 843–113 301 368-bp QTL. Finally, CALM1 encodes calmodulin, a calcium-binding protein, which interacts with titin and mediates smooth muscle contraction, making it a candidate for the BTA10 102 286 251–103 234 411-bp QTL. While the commercially tested CAST SNP rs41255587 was the most strongly associated with WBSF in the across-breed analysis (−log10P = 8.95), it was only the most strongly associated CAST SNP within Hereford and Charolais, with stronger associations being detected for SNPs in the 5′ upstream region in Angus, Limousin and Simmental (Table S3). In fact, the haplotype analysis moves the location of the most significantly associated SNP window 83.7 kb upstream of rs41255587 to be centred on rs43529872 (−log10P = 8.78), and this CAST window was found to explain the greatest amount of phenotypic variation in WBSF in the across-breed (1.02%; Table 3), Angus and Hereford analyses. The sign and magnitude of the ASE was consistent for rs41255587 in all breeds except Limousin, and the haplotype analysis explained considerably more variation in WBSF than the single SNP analysis, indicating that either the causal variant is not among the tested polymorphisms or that there is more than one causal variant. Furthermore, the haplotype analyses move the most likely location of the causal mutation 5′ of the commercially tested CAST SNP rs41255587, probably in the 678-kb region from 97 861 341–98 538 952 bp (Fig. 2). Clearly, additional fine-mapping is required to identify the number of mutations influencing WBSF that lie in the vicinity of CAST and their most likely locations.
Table 3

Percentages of phenotypic variation in WBSF explained by the commercialized SNPs, the most strongly associated SNPs and haplotypes within the most strongly associated nine SNP window within CAST and CAPN1.

LocusAll breedsAngusHerefordCharolaisLimousinSimmental
CAST (BTA7)
rs41255587198 579 5740.660.531.471.140.700.02
SNP20.6698 579 5740.5498 498 0471.4798 579 5741.1498 579 5742.2897 861 3411.1398 013 150
Window-P31.0298 495 8881.3698 495 8881.8898 566 3912.1098 538 9523.8897 501 8592.7797 861 341
Window-VP41.0298 495 8881.3698 495 8881.9298 495 8882.1098 538 9524.0298 375 6402.7797 861 341
CAPN1 (BTA29)
rs17812000144 069 0631.142.360.961.380.003.75
rs17871051144 085 6420.391.540.160.390.571.66
rs17872050144 097 6290.530.890.081.212.881.65
SNP21.1644 070 7132.3644 069 0631.6244 067 7961.5744 070 7132.8844 087 6294.6544 042 363
Window-P31.8044 067 7963.1844 068 5192.5944 062 6942.7644 070 8812.9944 087 3565.0544 067 234
Window-VP41.8544 068 1433.1944 068 4452.5944 062 6942.7644 070 8813.5244 070 8815.3544 068 143

CAST, calpastatin; CAPN1, calpain 1, (mu/I) large subunit; SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism; WBSF, Warner–Bratzler shear force.

Commercialized SNP and its chromosomal coordinate.

Most strongly associated SNP and its chromosomal coordinate.

Most strongly associated nine SNP window centred on SNP with shown chromosomal coordinate.

Nine SNP window explaining the greatest amount of phenotypic variation in WBSF.

Figure 2

Proportion of phenotypic variation in the across-breed analysis explained by haplotypes constructed from nine consecutive single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs) in the region of (a) BTA7 harbouring CAST and (b) BTA29 harbouring CAPN1. Locations and amount of variation explained by the commercialized tenderness SNPs are indicated by red dotted lines.

Proportion of phenotypic variation in the across-breed analysis explained by haplotypes constructed from nine consecutive single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs) in the region of (a) BTA7 harbouring CAST and (b) BTA29 harbouring CAPN1. Locations and amount of variation explained by the commercialized tenderness SNPs are indicated by red dotted lines. Percentages of phenotypic variation in WBSF explained by the commercialized SNPs, the most strongly associated SNPs and haplotypes within the most strongly associated nine SNP window within CAST and CAPN1. CAST, calpastatin; CAPN1, calpain 1, (mu/I) large subunit; SNP, single-nucleotide polymorphism; WBSF, Warner–Bratzler shear force. Commercialized SNP and its chromosomal coordinate. Most strongly associated SNP and its chromosomal coordinate. Most strongly associated nine SNP window centred on SNP with shown chromosomal coordinate. Nine SNP window explaining the greatest amount of phenotypic variation in WBSF. Among the SNP located within CAPN1, rs17812000 (c.316G>A) was most strongly associated with WBSF in Angus (−log10P = 9.70) and rs17872050 was the most strongly associated with WBSF in Limousin (−log10P = 3.23). However, rs42192103 was found to be slightly more strongly associated with WBSF than rs17812000 in the across-breed analysis (−log10P = 15.25 vs. 15.01), with an average ASE across breeds of 0.23 kg (Table S3). The amount of phenotypic variation explained in the haplotype-based analyses again indicates that none of the tested SNPs are causal for effects on WBSF and that the strongest signal for association with WBSF was in the 8187-bp region from 44 062 694 to 44 070 881 in all five breeds (Table S3). The size of this region is sufficiently small to speculate that there is probably only a single mutation in CAPN1 affecting WBSF in all Bos t. taurus cattle breeds, and the across-breed haplotype analysis shown in Table S3 and Fig.).

Conclusions

We conclusively demonstrate that none of the SNPs currently commercialized as diagnostics for genetic merit are causal for their effects on WBSF (Casas , 2006; Van Eenennaam ; Gill ). In fact, the complex patterns of LD in the vicinity of these genes among the different breeds (Figs S2 and S3) and the weaker associations in Limousin and Simmental (Fig. S1) result in different SNPs being most strongly associated with WBSF among the breeds (Table S3). However, by using haplotype-based analysis methods to dissect the variation within these genes, we localized the causal variants to be 5′ to the commercially tested SNPs. In the case of CAPN1, the higher SNP density achieved and the use of across-breed analysis, which erodes the patterns of LD within breeds, resolved the likely location of the causal variant to a region of only 4581 bp. We found evidence for a large number of QTL underlying variation in WBSF, and the majority of the previously published QTL were validated in this analysis. We found reasonably strong evidence that most QTL were segregating in all five breeds; however, the small genetic sample sizes for Limousin and Simmental make this comparison problematic, and it remains an unanswered question as to the extent to which breeds may share private alleles at QTL. This has previously been found in Belgian Blue, Marchigiana and Piedmontese cattle, where breed-specific polymorphisms in MSTN produce the double muscled phenotype (Grobet ; Kambadur ; McPherron & Lee 1997; Marchitelli ). This issue is of importance to the development of prediction equations for molecular breeding values in across-breed analyses, because the ASEs estimated for QTL regions will be averaged across breeds that segregate and those that do not segregate for certain QTL, which will limit the accuracy of molecular estimates of breeding value. Despite this, we found moderate correlations between GBLUP predictions of ASEs computed in the across- and within-breed analyses, suggesting that the BovineSNP50 assay has sufficient resolution for the development of prediction equations for genomic selection in beef cattle despite their considerably larger effective population size relative to dairy cattle (The Bovine HapMap Consortium 2009), and also that WBSF QTL are commonly shared among breeds. Despite the apparent reduced complexity of a trait such as meat tenderness relative to growth, there appear to be a large number of QTL underlying variation in WBSF, and the identification of all of the mutations that underlie these QTL might appear to be intractable. However, recent developments in high-density SNP genotyping, high-throughput sequencing and genotype imputation suggest new strategies for the rapid simultaneous identification of variants underlying quantitative traits genome-wide. We accomplished an average SNP spacing of 1139 bp for the 23 SNPs analysed within CAPN1, and this is only slightly smaller than could be accomplished genome-wide by jointly genotyping with the newly available Illumina BovineHD and Affymetrix BOS 1 assays (∼1.3 million SNP, data not shown). Furthermore, the design of these assays was facilitated by a community effort that produced more than 128.4X of genome sequence coverage on more than 80 animals, and SNP data from this work are now available in dbSNP. This project discovered 48.6 million high-quality SNPs, which must include many of the causal variants underlying quantitative variation in cattle, and it may be possible to impute genotypes at the resolution of the genome sequence (Daetwyler ) in populations that have been genotyped with both assays. Such a strategy could rapidly allow the identification of a large number of causal variants if the association analysis was performed in mixed breed populations.
  51 in total

1.  Comparative mapping of BTA15 and HSA11 including a region containing a QTL for meat tenderness.

Authors:  C E Rexroad ; G L Bennett; R T Stone; J W Keele; S C Fahrenkrug; B A Freking; S M Kappes; T P Smith
Journal:  Mamm Genome       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.957

2.  Evaluation of single-nucleotide polymorphisms in CAPN1 for association with meat tenderness in cattle.

Authors:  B T Page; E Casas; M P Heaton; N G Cullen; D L Hyndman; C A Morris; A M Crawford; T L Wheeler; M Koohmaraie; J W Keele; T P L Smith
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Consumer thresholds for establishing the value of beef tenderness.

Authors:  M F Miller; M A Carr; C B Ramsey; K L Crockett; L C Hoover
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  The age of a neutral mutant persisting in a finite population.

Authors:  M Kimura; T Ohta
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1973-09       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  National Beef Quality Audit: survey of producer-related defects and carcass quality and quantity attributes.

Authors:  C L Lorenzen; D S Hale; D B Griffin; J W Savell; K E Belk; T L Frederick; M F Miller; T H Montgomery; G C Smith
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 6.  The calpain system.

Authors:  Darrell E Goll; ValeryY F Thompson; Hongqi Li; Wei Wei; Jinyang Cong
Journal:  Physiol Rev       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 37.312

7.  Effect of sire on mu- and m-calpain activity and rate of tenderization as indicated by myofibril fragmentation indices of steaks from Brahman cattle.

Authors:  D G Riley; C C Chase; T D Pringle; R L West; D D Johnson; T A Olson; A C Hammond; S W Coleman
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Detection of quantitative trait loci for growth and carcass composition in cattle.

Authors:  E Casas; S D Shackelford; J W Keele; M Koohmaraie; T P L Smith; R T Stone
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.159

9.  Retail consumer acceptance of beef tenderized with calcium chloride.

Authors:  M F Miller; K L Huffman; S Y Gilbert; L L Hamman; C B Ramsey
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  Double muscling in Marchigiana beef breed is caused by a stop codon in the third exon of myostatin gene.

Authors:  Cinzia Marchitelli; Maria Carmela Savarese; Alessandra Crisà; Alessandro Nardone; Paolo Ajmone Marsan; Alessio Valentini
Journal:  Mamm Genome       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.957

View more
  27 in total

1.  Genome-wide association study identifies loci and candidate genes for meat quality traits in Simmental beef cattle.

Authors:  Jiangwei Xia; Xin Qi; Yang Wu; Bo Zhu; Lingyang Xu; Lupei Zhang; Xue Gao; Yan Chen; Junya Li; Huijiang Gao
Journal:  Mamm Genome       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 2.957

2.  A novel analytical method, Birth Date Selection Mapping, detects response of the Angus (Bos taurus) genome to selection on complex traits.

Authors:  Jared E Decker; Daniel A Vasco; Stephanie D McKay; Matthew C McClure; Megan M Rolf; JaeWoo Kim; Sally L Northcutt; Stewart Bauck; Brent W Woodward; Robert D Schnabel; Jeremy F Taylor
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2012-11-09       Impact factor: 3.969

3.  Polymorphisms in epigenetic and meat quality related genes in fourteen cattle breeds and association with beef quality and carcass traits.

Authors:  Xuan Liu; Tahir Usman; Yachun Wang; Zezhao Wang; Xianzhou Xu; Meng Wu; Yi Zhang; Xu Zhang; Qiang Li; Lin Liu; Wanhai Shi; Chunhua Qin; Fanjun Geng; Congyong Wang; Rui Tan; Xixia Huang; Airong Liu; Hongjun Wu; Shixin Tan; Ying Yu
Journal:  Asian-Australas J Anim Sci       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.509

4.  Comparison of Bayesian models to estimate direct genomic values in multi-breed commercial beef cattle.

Authors:  Megan M Rolf; Dorian J Garrick; Tara Fountain; Holly R Ramey; Robert L Weaber; Jared E Decker; E John Pollak; Robert D Schnabel; Jeremy F Taylor
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 4.297

5.  Susceptibility loci revealed for bovine respiratory disease complex in pre-weaned holstein calves.

Authors:  Holly L Neibergs; Christopher M Seabury; Andrzej J Wojtowicz; Zeping Wang; Erik Scraggs; Jennifer N Kiser; Mahesh Neupane; James E Womack; Alison Van Eenennaam; Gerald Robert Hagevoort; Terry W Lehenbauer; Sharif Aly; Jessica Davis; Jeremy F Taylor
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-12-22       Impact factor: 3.969

6.  Detection of selection signatures in Piemontese and Marchigiana cattle, two breeds with similar production aptitudes but different selection histories.

Authors:  Silvia Sorbolini; Gabriele Marras; Giustino Gaspa; Corrado Dimauro; Massimo Cellesi; Alessio Valentini; Nicolò Pp Macciotta
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-06-23       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  Multibreed genome wide association can improve precision of mapping causative variants underlying milk production in dairy cattle.

Authors:  Lesley-Ann Raven; Benjamin G Cocks; Ben J Hayes
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 3.969

8.  Genome-wide association mapping including phenotypes from relatives without genotypes in a single-step (ssGWAS) for 6-week body weight in broiler chickens.

Authors:  Huiyu Wang; Ignacy Misztal; Ignacio Aguilar; Andres Legarra; Rohan L Fernando; Zulma Vitezica; Ron Okimoto; Terry Wing; Rachel Hawken; William M Muir
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 4.599

9.  Novel genomic approaches unravel genetic architecture of complex traits in apple.

Authors:  Satish Kumar; Dorian J Garrick; Marco Cam Bink; Claire Whitworth; David Chagné; Richard K Volz
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 3.969

10.  Rapid screening for phenotype-genotype associations by linear transformations of genomic evaluations.

Authors:  Jose L Gualdrón Duarte; Rodolfo J C Cantet; Ronald O Bates; Catherine W Ernst; Nancy E Raney; Juan P Steibel
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2014-07-19       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.