| Literature DB >> 31269896 |
Mohammad Al Kalaldeh1,2, John Gibson3,4, Sang Hong Lee5, Cedric Gondro4,6, Julius H J van der Werf3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed at identifying genomic regions that underlie genetic variation of worm egg count, as an indicator trait for parasite resistance in a large population of Australian sheep, which was genotyped with the high-density 600 K Ovine single nucleotide polymorphism array. This study included 7539 sheep from different locations across Australia that underwent a field challenge with mixed gastrointestinal parasite species. Faecal samples were collected and worm egg counts for three strongyle species, i.e. Teladorsagia circumcincta, Haemonchus contortus and Trichostrongylus colubriformis were determined. Data were analysed using genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and regional heritability mapping (RHM).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31269896 PMCID: PMC6609385 DOI: 10.1186/s12711-019-0479-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genet Sel Evol ISSN: 0999-193X Impact factor: 4.297
Fig. 1Number of records across ages (per day)
Proportions of different breeds’ ancestry in the population
| Breed | BL | COR | SUF | WS | BRL | WD | PD | TEX | PS | MER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proportion (%) | 10.9 | 0.8 | 2.5 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 10.0 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 70.0 |
BL Border Leicester, COR Corriedale, WD White Dorper, PD Poll Dorset, TEX Texel, PS Prime Samm, MER Merino, SUF Suffolk, WS White Suffolk, BRL Booroola
Fig. 2Manhattan plot of GWAS results for parasite resistance in Australian sheep. The y-axis shows the (p-values) of single-SNP association and the x-axis shows the position of the SNPs across the 26 chromosomes. Genome-wide significant SNPs (FDR of 5%) are highlighted by red dots
List of significant SNPs identified by GWAS for parasite resistance in Australian sheep
| OAR | SNP | Variant type | Position (chr:bp) | Nearest gene | p-value | FDR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Distance | ||||||
| 2 | rs421630816 | Intron | 2:110875234 |
| Within | 6.7 × 10−8 | 0.02 |
| 2 | rs424521894 | Downstream gene | 2:107301187 |
| Within | 8.6 × 10−8 | 0.02 |
| 2 | rs413835864 | Intron | 2:107458856 |
| Within | 1.1 × 10−7 | 0.03 |
Significant SNPs were selected at a FDR of 5%
Fig. 3Quantile-quantile (Q–Q) plot of the observed p-values from the expected p-values of GWAS results (λ = 0.95). The observed (p-values) are shown by black dots, and the expected values under null distribution are shown by a red line. Significant SNPs (FDR of 5%) are highlighted by red dots
Summary of significant windows identified by RHM using window sizes of 1000, 500 and 200 SNPs
| Window # | OAR | Position (bp) | LRT | −logP | FDR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Start | End | ||||||
| 1000-SNP window analysis | |||||||
| 159 | 2 | 106479658 | 112388825 | 0.007 | 19.2 | 5.23 | 0.001 |
| 160 | 2 | 109055156 | 115988999 | 0.007 | 17.2 | 4.76 | 0.003 |
| 161 | 2 | 112409311 | 118712363 | 0.010 | 22.6 | 5.99 | 0.001 |
| 412 | 6 | 32700889 | 37820042 | 0.009 | 20.0 | 5.40 | 0.001 |
| 413 | 6 | 35275766 | 40133729 | 0.010 | 24.8 | 6.49 | 0.000 |
| 414 | 6 | 37828214 | 42360019 | 0.007 | 13.6 | 3.93 | 0.019 |
| 500-SNP window analysis | |||||||
| 318 | 2 | 106479658 | 109049182 | 0.006 | 16.7 | 4.66 | 0.006 |
| 319 | 2 | 107706511 | 110358002 | 0.007 | 13.6 | 3.93 | 0.021 |
| 320 | 2 | 109055156 | 112388825 | 0.007 | 15.9 | 4.46 | 0.009 |
| 321 | 2 | 110360839 | 114468943 | 0.006 | 17.0 | 4.71 | 0.006 |
| 322 | 2 | 112409311 | 115988999 | 0.007 | 14.7 | 4.19 | 0.013 |
| 323 | 2 | 114470485 | 117276436 | 0.012 | 18.3 | 5.02 | 0.004 |
| 324 | 2 | 115995299 | 118712363 | 0.008 | 18.9 | 5.17 | 0.003 |
| 325 | 2 | 117294302 | 119911849 | 0.006 | 15.0 | 4.26 | 0.012 |
| 830 | 6 | 34069188 | 36548480 | 0.007 | 13.1 | 3.82 | 0.025 |
| 831 | 6 | 35275766 | 37820042 | 0.009 | 21.0 | 5.64 | 0.002 |
| 832 | 6 | 36552018 | 38994028 | 0.007 | 23.2 | 6.14 | 0.001 |
| 833 | 6 | 37828214 | 40133729 | 0.008 | 19.0 | 5.18 | 0.003 |
| 200-SNP window analysis | |||||||
| 798 | 2 | 106987063 | 107924749 | 0.005 | 13.13 | 3.83 | 0.051 |
| 799 | 2 | 107447474 | 108441185 | 0.007 | 18.8 | 5.14 | 0.007 |
| 804 | 2 | 110107622 | 111043903 | 0.007 | 13.6 | 3.95 | 0.048 |
| 805 | 2 | 110590464 | 112388825 | 0.006 | 20.2 | 5.46 | 0.005 |
| 806 | 2 | 111047822 | 113380103 | 0.006 | 13.1 | 3.82 | 0.055 |
| 814 | 2 | 117019488 | 118134501 | 0.007 | 17.5 | 4.83 | 0.009 |
| 2088 | 6 | 35275766 | 36251932 | 0.005 | 13.6 | 3.95 | 0.047 |
| 2089 | 6 | 35743335 | 36802158 | 0.005 | 13.5 | 3.95 | 0.047 |
| 2090 | 6 | 36252650 | 37275709 | 0.005 | 15.0 | 4.27 | 0.030 |
| 2091 | 6 | 36805051 | 37820042 | 0.010 | 22.4 | 5.94 | 0.003 |
| 2092 | 6 | 37286366 | 38279284 | 0.008 | 24.6 | 6.45 | 0.002 |
| 2093 | 6 | 37828214 | 38766020 | 0.006 | 19.8 | 5.36 | 0.005 |
| 4122 | 18 | 17645871 | 18425906 | 0.007 | 17.8 | 4.91 | 0.009 |
| 4123 | 18 | 18057085 | 18957804 | 0.005 | 13.2 | 3.84 | 0.051 |
| 4879 | 24 | 40476812 | 41995998 | 0.008 | 18.3 | 5.02 | 0.008 |
: regional genomic heritability; SE: standard error; -logP:
Significant windows were selected at a FDR of 5%
Fig. 4Regional heritability mapping (RHM) across the genome. The y-axis shows the associated with each window and the x-axis shows the window number across the genome. Windows were analyzed using 1000-SNP (top plot), 500-SNP (middle plot) and 200-SNP windows (lower plot). Genome-wide significant windows (FDR of 5%) are highlighted by red dots
Fig. 5Quantile-quantile (Q–Q) plot of the observed p-values from the expected p-values of RHM using (1) 1000-SNP window size (λ = 1.06), (2) 500-SNP window size (λ = 1.08), and 200-SNP window size (λ = 1.09). The observed (p-values) are shown by black dots, and the expected values under null distribution are shown by a red line. Significant windows (FDR of 5%) are highlighted by red dots
Fig. 6RHM and GWAS results of the identified region on OAR2 between 100 and 124 Mb (top plot) and on OAR6 between 28 and 44 Mb (bottom plot). The solid lines show the RHM results using three window sizes (1000 SNPs = green; 500 SNPs = blue; 200 SNPs = red), where each window is positioned at the window midpoint. Grey dots show the GWAS results within each region
Fig. 7Comparison of RHM results using 200-SNP windows between the Merino population and the entire sheep population for the target regions on (1) OAR2, (2) OAR18, (3) OAR6, and (4) OAR24. The red lines represent the RHM results for the entire sheep population and blue lines represent the RHM results for Merino sheep population
Fig. 8Conditional GWAS plots for the region between 100 and 120 Mbp on OAR2. The first plot shows GWAS results with no conditioning. Subsequent plots show GWAS results conditioned on the first and second significant SNPs (rs421630816 and rs424521894) as well as SNP rs425769499, the top ranked SNP in a region between 117 and 118 Mbp
Fig. 9Conditional GWAS plots for the region between 29 and 44 Mbp on OAR6. The left plot shows GWAS results with no conditioning. Right plot shows GWAS results conditioned on rs416517011, the sixth top ranked SNP based on GWAS
RHM analysis conditioned on adding significant regions to the model sequentially
| Scenario | Logl | Logl null | LRT | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | 0.004 (0.002) | 0.19 (0.02) | − 10667 | − 10671 | 8 |
| R1 + R2 | 0.006 (0.003) | 0.18 (0.02) | − 10666 | − 10672 | 12 |
| R1 + R2 + R3 | 0.008 (0.003) | 0.18 (0.02) | − 10664 | − 10672 | 16 |
| R1 + R2 + R3 + R4 | 0.015 (0.005) | 0.17 (0.02) | − 10656 | − 10674 | 36 |
| R1 + R2 + R3 + R4 + R5 | 0.024 (0.007) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10649 | − 10674 | 50 |
| R1 + R2 + R3 + R4 + R5 + R6 | 0.030 (0.008) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10644 | − 10675 | 62 |
R1: between 107 and 108 Mbp on OAR2; R2: between 110 and 113 Mbp on OAR2; R3: between 117 and 118 Mbp on OAR2; R4: between 34 and 39 Mbp on OAR6, R5: between 17 and 18 Mbp on OAR18; and R6: between 40 and 41 Mbp on OAR24
: variance due to regions defined in each scenario and estimated with a GRM constructed from SNPs in these regions
: is the complementary GRM containing all SNPs from the 600 k excluding the SNPs fitted in
Logl: log likelihood for the tested model which includes both and
Logl null: log likelihood for the null model which includes only
SE: standard error
RHM analysis conditioned on adding the top SNPs from GWAS to the model sequentially
| Scenario | Logl | LRT | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No condition | 0.030 (0.008) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10644 | – |
| Cond. on S1 | 0.028 (0.008) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10643 | 2 |
| Cond. on S1 + S2 | 0.026 (0.007) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10642 | 4 |
| Cond. on S1 + S2 + S3 | 0.026 (0.007) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10644 | 0 |
| Cond. on S1 + S2 + S3 + S4 | 0.023 (0.007) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10641 | 6 |
| Cond. on S1 + S2 + S3 + S4 + S5 | 0.020 (0.006) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10637 | 14 |
| Cond. on S1 + S2 + S3 + S4 + S5 + S6 | 0.019 (0.006) | 0.16 (0.02) | − 10636 | 16 |
GRM and GRM as in Table 4
S1: rs421630816; S2: rs424521894; S3: rs425769499; S4: rs416517011; S5: rs404837788; S6: rs413573644
Logl: log likelihood
SE: standard error
Fig. 10Linkage disequilibrium (LD) map for the region between 107.33 and 107.38 Mbp on OAR2. The haplotype block (block 6) containing the four SNPs (rs410520650, rs424530281, rs411875640 and rs404912266) is highlithed in blue boxes
Haplotype association analysis of block 6 (107.33–107.38 Mbp on OAR2) with parasite resistance
| Haplotype | Effectsa ( | |
|---|---|---|
| TTTG | 0.093388 | 0.00601 |
| TTTA | 0.002921 | 0.89287 |
| CTTG | − 0.083304 | 0.02507 |
| CATG | − 0.045274 | 0.83761 |
| CACG | − 0.028541 | 0.39638 |
| CTTA | 0.816840 | 0.00592 |
The overall association between haplotypes and the trait was significant ( < 0.003). Significance level at 0.05.
aEstimates of regression coefficients () in phenotypic standard deviation (STD) units of the trait
2The for testing null hypothesis of
Fig. 11Clustering of animals based on the plot of principal components (PC1 and PC2). Animals were coloured based on their breed composition of purebred Merino and composition of other breeds, with the breed that makes up more than 50% of the breed proportion. BL Border Leicester; COR Corriedale; TEX Texel; SUF Suffolk; BRL Booroola; WD White Dorper; PS Prime Samm; PD Poll Dorset; and MER pure Merino. The grey colour represents animals of different crosses but with less than 50% of a particular breed composition
List of genes in the significant regions
| OAR | Position (Mbp) | Genes |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | 106.9–108.4 |
|
| 2 | 110.1–113.3 | |
| 2 | 117.0–118.1 | |
| 6 | 34.7–39.2 | |
| 18 | 17.6–18.9 | |
| 24 | 40.4–41.9 |
List of genes involved in immune responses and the immune pathways they belong to.
| Pathways | OAR2 | OAR6 | OAR18 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Immune system | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||||
| Adaptive immune system | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||||||
| Class I MHC mediated antigen processing & presentation | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||||||
| Antigen processing: ubiquitination and proteasome degradation | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||||||
| Innate immune system | x | x | |||||||||||
| B cell receptor signaling pathway | x | ||||||||||||
| Toll-like receptor signaling pathway | x | ||||||||||||
| Regulation of toll-like receptor signaling pathway | x | ||||||||||||
| Fc gamma R-mediated phagocytosis | x | ||||||||||||
| Fcgamma receptor (FCGR) dependent phagocytosis | x | ||||||||||||
| Interferon signaling | x | x | |||||||||||
| Cytokine signaling in immune system | x | x | |||||||||||
| Interferon alpha/beta signaling | x | ||||||||||||
| Antiviral mechanism by IFN-stimulated genes | x | ||||||||||||
| Interleukin-11 signaling pathway | x | ||||||||||||
| IL-1 signaling pathway | x |
Ovine chromosomes OAR (Ovis aries)
Gene symbols in italics