| Literature DB >> 24086604 |
Heli Venhoranta1, Hubert Pausch, Michal Wysocki, Izabela Szczerbal, Reetta Hänninen, Juhani Taponen, Pekka Uimari, Krzysztof Flisikowski, Hannes Lohi, Ruedi Fries, Marek Switonski, Magnus Andersson.
Abstract
Impaired migration of primordial germ cells during embryonic development causes hereditary gonadal hypoplasia in both sexes of Northern Finncattle and Swedish Mountain cattle. The affected gonads exhibit a lack of or, in rare cases, a reduced number of germ cells. Most affected animals present left-sided gonadal hypoplasia. However, right-sided and bilateral cases are also found. This type of gonadal hypoplasia prevails in animals with white coat colour. Previous studies indicated that gonadal hypoplasia is inherited in an autosomal recessive fashion with incomplete penetrance. In order to identify genetic regions underlying gonadal hypoplasia, a genome-wide association study (GWAS) and a copy number variation (CNV) analysis were performed with 94 animals, including 21 affected animals, using bovine 777,962 SNP arrays. The GWAS and CNV results revealed two significantly associated regions on bovine chromosomes (BTA) 29 and 6, respectively (P=2.19 x 10(-13) and P=5.65 x 10(-6)). Subsequent cytogenetic and PCR analyses demonstrated that homozygosity of a ~500 kb chromosomal segment translocated from BTA6 to BTA29 (Cs29 allele) is the underlying genetic mechanism responsible for gonadal hypoplasia. The duplicated segment includes the KIT gene that is known to regulate the migration of germ cells and precursors of melanocytes. This duplication is also one of the two translocations associated with colour sidedness in various cattle breeds.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24086604 PMCID: PMC3784456 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075659
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Left-sided gonadal hypoplasia.
(A) Hypoplastic ovary (left arrow) and normal ovary (right arrow). (B) Hypoplastic testicle (left) and normal testicle (right).
Organisation of four different case-control designs.
| Control cohort | Case cohort | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gonadal hypoplasia | UNAFF | AFF | UNAFF | AFF | ||||||||||
| Coat colour | W | B | U | W | B | U | total | W | B | U | W | B | U | total |
| Design A | 20 | 20 | 21 | 21 | ||||||||||
| Design B | 40 | 20 | 13 | 73 | 21 | 21 | ||||||||
| Design C | 40 | 40 | 21 | 21 | ||||||||||
| Design D | 40 | 40 | 20 | 20 | ||||||||||
Four different case-control cohorts were established (A-D). The coat colour of the animals was assessed as predominantly white (W), predominantly black/brown (B) and unknown (U). The gonadal hypoplasia status was assessed as a binary trait (affected (AFF) and unaffected (UNAFF)).
Figure 2Association of 647,971 SNPs in four different case control scenarios.
The Manhattan plots represent the -log10(P) values of association for 647,971 SNPs in four different case-control designs (Table 1). The red dots represent significantly associated SNPs (P < 7.71 x 10-8).
Figure 3Association of 2101 autosomal CNVs with the affection status of 94 animals.
The presence of CNV segments was compared in 21 cases and 73 controls using Fisher exact tests. The dots represent SNPs within the CNV segments. Red dots represent SNPs in significantly overrepresented CNVs in cases vs. controls (P < 2.38 x 10-5).
Figure 4Schematic view of two CNV segments on BTA6 and BTA29.
The figures display 5-SNP-sliding-window log R ratios in 75 unaffected (grey) and 21 affected (blue) animals on BTA6 (A) and BTA29 (B). The grey shaded box represents the extent of the two CNV segments. The gene content was assessed based on the University of Maryland assembly.
The PCR analysis of CNVs.
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +/+ | +/Cs29 | Cs29/Cs29 | +/+ | +/Cs29 | Cs29/Cs29 | |
| +/+ | 0 | 0 | 6 | 10 | 17 | 4 |
| Cs6/- | 0 | 0 | 15 | 10 | 20 | 14 |
| total | 0 | 0 | 21 | 20 | 37 | 18 |
The PCR analysis of CNVs based on primers designed by Durkin et al. [15] and us. All 96 animals were analysed including two control animals whose genotyping failed. The animals are divided according to alleles in BTA29 and BTA6. Heterozygous and homozygous carriers of the Cs6 allele could not be distinguished.