Unfortunately, the original version of this article [1] contained an error. Table 2 values were included incorrectly. The correct values can be found below. These values should also be indicated under the “Data inspection” subsection, first paragraph found under “Gene networks for growth and meat quality traits” section:
Table 2
Trait data and GWAS results information
Trait
n
min
max
avr
SD
h2
p ≤ 10 − 3
p ≤ 10 − 4
p ≤ 10 − 5
TCW
671
182.5
346.8
250.26
27.88
0.254
1246
219
32
(0.042)
(17.97)
(10.26)
(7.03)
DRE
671
42.6
86.5
56.22
3.63
0.096
680
100
20
(0.031)
(33.02)
(22.49)
(11.25)
REA
669
39.24
84.43
60.45
7.26
0.473
826
157
31
(0.049)
(27.16)
(14.32)
(7.26)
BFT
669
0.07
20
6.16
2.25
0.154
1723
305
56
(0.041)
(12.97)
(7.37)
(4.02)
LM
671
33.5
49.43
40.09
3.18
0.045
957
218
64
(0.030)
(23.43)
(10.31)
(3.51)
LF
671
16.54
84.36
75.65
4.45
0.049
1388
340
96
(0.021)
(16.12)
(6.61)
(2.34)
PH
666
5.00
6.9
5.54
0.21
0.026
928
215
56
(0.022)
(24.17)
(10.45)
(4.02)
CLO
667
14.42
66.90
28.71
5.21
0.099
939
138
22
(0.041)
(23.88)
(16.29)
(10.22)
Trait data and GWAS results information“…higher estimates were observed for rib eye area (REA; h2 = 0.473), total carcass weight (TCW; h2 = 0.254) and back fat thickness (BFT; h2 = 0.154). There was a negative correlation between BFT and REA (-0.604) and between BFT and TCW (-0.632) and a strong positive correlation between TCW and REA (0.762) which makes biological sense indicating that the data is consistent.”
Authors: Maurício A Mudadu; Laercio R Porto-Neto; Fabiana B Mokry; Polyana C Tizioto; Priscila S N Oliveira; Rymer R Tullio; Renata T Nassu; Simone C M Niciura; Patrícia Tholon; Maurício M Alencar; Roberto H Higa; Antônio N Rosa; Gélson L D Feijó; André L J Ferraz; Luiz O C Silva; Sérgio R Medeiros; Dante P Lanna; Michele L Nascimento; Amália S Chaves; Andrea R D L Souza; Irineu U Packer; Roberto A A Torres; Fabiane Siqueira; Gerson B Mourão; Luiz L Coutinho; Antonio Reverter; Luciana C A Regitano Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2016-03-15 Impact factor: 3.969