Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33407097›Full record

SynthesisBMC genomics2021

A meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies for average daily gain and lean meat percentage in two Duroc pig populations.

Shenping Zhou, Rongrong Ding, Fanming Meng, Xingwang Wang, Zhanwei Zhuang, Jianping Quan, Qian Geng, Jie Wu, Enqin Zheng, Zhenfang Wu and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shenping ZhouCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Rongrong DingCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Fanming MengState Key Laboratory of Livestock and Poultry Breeding / Guangdong Key Laboratory of Animal Breeding and Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, 510640, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Xingwang WangCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Zhanwei ZhuangCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Jianping QuanCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Qian GengCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Jie WuCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Enqin ZhengCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Zhenfang WuCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.
Jianhui YangYueYang Vocational Technical College, Yueyang, 414000, Hunan, People's Republic of China. 178479769@qq.com.
Jie YangCollege of Animal Science and National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. jieyang2012@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7031-2160
South China Agricultural University · CNHunan Institute of Science and Technology · CNGuangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CN

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province 2018B030315007Peral River Nova Program of Guangzhou (CN) 201906010011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAverage daily gain (ADG) and lean meat percentage (LMP) are the main production performance indicators of pigs. Nevertheless, the genetic architecture of ADG and LMP is still elusive. Here, we conducted genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and meta-analysis for ADG and LMP in 3770 American and 2090 Canadian Duroc pigs.

resultsIn the American Duroc pigs, one novel pleiotropic quantitative trait locus (QTL) on Sus scrofa chromosome 1 (SSC1) was identified to be associated with ADG and LMP, which spans 2.53 Mb (from 159.66 to 162.19 Mb). In the Canadian Duroc pigs, two novel QTLs on SSC1 were detected for LMP, which were situated in 3.86 Mb (from 157.99 to 161.85 Mb) and 555 kb (from 37.63 to 38.19 Mb) regions. The meta-analysis identified ten and 20 additional SNPs for ADG and LMP, respectively. Finally, four genes (PHLPP1, STC1, DYRK1B, and PIK3C2A) were detected to be associated with ADG and/or LMP. Further bioinformatics analysis showed that the candidate genes for ADG are mainly involved in bone growth and development, whereas the candidate genes for LMP mainly participated in adipose tissue and muscle tissue growth and development.

conclusionsWe performed GWAS and meta-analysis for ADG and LMP based on a large sample size consisting of two Duroc pig populations. One pleiotropic QTL that shared a 2.19 Mb haplotype block from 159.66 to 161.85 Mb on SSC1 was found to affect ADG and LMP in the two Duroc pig populations. Furthermore, the combination of single-population and meta-analysis of GWAS improved the efficiency of detecting additional SNPs for the analyzed traits. Our results provide new insights into the genetic architecture of ADG and LMP traits in pigs. Moreover, some significant SNPs associated with ADG and/or LMP in this study may be useful for marker-assisted selection in pig breeding.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyQuantitative Trait LociAnimalsCanadaMeatPhenotypePolymorphism, Single NucleotideSus scrofaSwineAverage daily gainGWASLean meat percentageMeta-analysisPigs

Identifiers

PMID33407097
PMCPMC7788875
OpenAlexW3119202745

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.