| Literature DB >> 33853519 |
Maria K Rosengren1, Heiðrún Sigurðardóttir2,3, Marina Solé2, Gabriella Lindgren2,4, Susanne Eriksson2, Rakan Naboulsi2, Ahmad Jouni2, Miguel Novoa-Bravo2,5, Elsa Albertsdóttir6, Þorvaldur Kristjánsson3, Marie Rhodin7, Åsa Viklund2, Brandon D Velie8, Juan J Negro9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The back plays a vital role in horse locomotion, where the spine functions as a spring during the stride cycle. A complex interaction between the spine and the muscles of the back contribute to locomotion soundness, gait ability, and performance of riding and racehorses. Conformation is commonly used to select horses for breeding and performance in multiple horse breeds, where the back and croup conformation plays a significant role. The conformation of back and croup plays an important role on riding ability in Icelandic horses. However, the genes behind this trait are still unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify genomic regions associated with conformation of back and croup in Icelandic horses and to investigate their effects on riding ability. One hundred seventy-seven assessed Icelandic horses were included in the study. A genome-wide association analysis was performed using the 670 K+ Axiom Equine Genotyping Array, and the effects of different haplotypes in the top associated region were estimated for riding ability and additional conformation traits assessed during breeding field tests.Entities:
Keywords: Back; Backline; Conformation; Croup; High-density genome scan; Icelandic horse; Lateral gait quality; Novel QTL
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33853519 PMCID: PMC8048352 DOI: 10.1186/s12864-021-07454-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Fig. 1GWA results for the score of back and croup. a. QQ plot where the blue lines represent the 0.05–0.95 confidence interval. The estimated lambda value was 0.98 (se 2.55 × 10− 5). b. Manhattan plot from the mixed model association analysis. The red horizontal line indicates Bonferroni significance threshold (p < 6.9 × 10− 8) and the blue horizontal line indicates the suggestive genome-wide significance level (p < 1.0 × 10− 5). c. LD Manhattan plot on ECA22 with the top SNP as an open circle. Thirteen SNPs reached the suggestive threshold of which ten were in LD. All positions refer to EquCab3.0
Results from haplotype analysis for the score of back and croup
| Haplotypes (SNPs numbersa) | Coef | Freq | Sim. | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8a | 9 | 10 | ||||
| G | T | C | A | T | A | T | A | A | T | −0.300 | 0.383 | ||
| G | T | C | A | T | A | T | A | G | C | 0.090 | 0.021 | 0.657 | 0.718 |
| G | T | C | A | G | G | G | A | A | T | 0.119 | 0.027 | 0.518 | 0.889 |
| G | C | T | C | T | A | G | A | A | T | 0.090 | 0.025 | 0.626 | 0.963 |
| A | C | T | C | G | G | G | G | G | C | 0.300 | 0.474 | ||
Sim. p-value = p-value adjusted by using 100,000 permutations
Significant results in bold
Coef. coefficient, estimated effect of the haplotype on the score of back and croup from the glm model in the haplotype analysis
Freq. frequencies
aSNP numbers in bp position order with top SNP as number 8 with reference allele A and alternate allele G
Significant results from t-test comparing phenotypes in horses with different haplotypes
| Trait | Favorable haplotype | Unfavorable haplotype | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Mean | N | Mean | df | |||
| Back and croup | 34 | 8.29 | 28 | 7.71 | 4.05 | 58.08 | < 0.001 |
| Tölta | 33 | 8.41 | 27 | 7.96 | 2.52 | 45.79 | 0.015 |
| Pacea | 33 | 7.18 | 27 | 6.09 | 2.99 | 50.24 | 0.004 |
| Slow tölta | 33 | 8.14 | 26 | 7.73 | 2.14 | 45.19 | 0.038 |
| Depth at breast (M4)b | 33 | 63.2 | 28 | 64.6 | −3.52 | 56.22 | 0.001 |
| Width of the hips (M7)b | 23 | 47.0 | 20 | 48.1 | −2.21 | 37.54 | 0.033 |
| Width between thigh bones (M8)b | 23 | 43.0 | 20 | 44.2 | −2.23 | 38.86 | 0.031 |
| Length of forelimbs (M1-2xM4)b | 33 | 15.2 | 28 | 12.1 | 3.22 | 40.81 | 0.003 |
| Backlinec | 34 | 1.79 | 28 | 2.25 | −2.69 | 58.91 | 0.009 |
| Croup typec | 34 | 1.85 | 28 | 2.18 | −2.31 | 53.23 | 0.025 |
N Number of horses
aSubjectively assessed traits (scale 5–10)
bZoometric measurements (cm)
cSubjectively assessed sub-traits (scale 1–3)
Allele frequency of top SNP for back and croup and DMRT3
| Breed | Top SNP | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | AF alt | Source | N | AF alt | Source | |
| Icelandic horses included in present studya | 177 | 0.50 | Array genotyping | 177 | 0.94 | Array genotyping |
| Icelandic horses unassessedb | 49 | 0.51 | SNP genotyping | 49 | 0.90 | SNP genotyping |
| Rocky-Mountain | 36 | 0.33 | SNP genotyping | 27 | 1 | SNP genotyping |
Colombian paso horses Colombian trocha | 37 | 0.24 | Array genotyping | 37 | 0.0 | SNP genotyping |
| Colombian trot and gallop | 11 | 0.23 | Array genotyping | 11 | 0.0 | SNP genotyping |
| Colombian paso fino | 38 | 0.29 | SNP genotyping | 28 | 1 | [ |
| American Curly | 27 | 0.32 | SNP genotyping | 101 | 0.70 | [ |
| American Saddlebred | 42 | 0.29 | SNP genotyping | 89 | 0.28 | [ |
| Morgan | 30 | 0.44 | SNP genotyping | 59 | 0.14 | [ |
| Exmoor | 279 | 0.01 | [ | 27 | 0.0 | [ |
| Connemara Pony | 40 | 0.05 | [ | 35 | 0.0 | [ |
| Swedish Warmblood | 379 | 0.26 | [ | 64 | 0.0 | [ |
| Thoroughbred racehorses | 370 | 0.14 | [ | 55 | 0.0 | [ |
| Persian-Arabian horses | 101 | 0.32 | [ | 69 | 0.0 | [ |
| North-Swedish draught | 25 | 0.38 | [ | 34 | 0.0 | [ |
| Coldblooded trotters | 565 | 0.13 | [ | 306 | 0.45 | [ |
| Standardbred | 40 | 0.29 | SNP genotyping | 270 | 0.97 | [ |
N number of horses included in dataset
Top SNP the top SNP identified from the GWA analysis for back and croup
AF alt frequency of alternate allele
DMRT3 AF alt allele frequency of the alternate allele A in the DMRT3 gene known as the “Gait Keeper” mutation
aThe 177 Icelandic horses included in the present study
bIcelandic horses used for riding but that had not attended breeding field test
Fig. 2Examples of Icelandic horses representing high and low score of back and croup. a. Icelandic horse that represents high score of back and croup. The backline is well-balanced and the back is wide and well-muscled. (Photo: Hrefna María Ómarsdóttir). b. Icelandic horse that represents a low score of back and croup with a forward sloping backline and a less muscled croup. (Photo: The Swedish Icelandic Horse Association, SIF). Images used in the figure are privately owned and thus were not taken from previously published sources requiring written permission for use
Fig. 3Distribution of scores for back and croup in the 177 horses. (Picture generated from the data analysis in R)
Fig. 4Zoometric measurements recorded at standardized breeding field tests for Icelandic horses [68]. Original images created by Pétur Behrens. Images used in the figure are privately owned and thus were not taken from previously published sources requiring written permission for use
Fig. 5MDS plot for the score back and croup. Visualization of population stratification across the 177 Icelandic horses that passed the QC for the score back and croup. Red represents horses that had a score lower than the mean 8.1 and blue represents horses that had a score higher or equal to 8.1