SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 65 - Sayı: 4

A genomic investigation on hybrid sterility in house mouse using a two stage model

İki aşamalı bir model kullanarak ev faresinde hibrit sterilite üzerine genomik bir araştırma

Burak KARACAÖREN
Pages
387–393
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results showed that two stage model had higher power to detect the pleiotropic QTL than the single marker model.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Genome wide association studies (GWASs) commonly used to search for genetic variants associated with quantitative traits.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Two stage model detected 50 and 53 major SNP effects using first and the second principal components.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results showed that two stage model had higher power to detect the pleiotropic QTL than the single marker model.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Genome wide association studies (GWASs) commonly used to search for genetic variants associated with quantitative traits. Pleiotropic effect of genes may cause the observed correlations among different phenotypes. This study proposed a two stage multilocus model for pleiotropic GWAS using a Bayesian mixture model to take into account of both small and major gene effects. The objectives of this study were to investigate if the two-stage model was useful for detecting pleiotropic genes using a simulated data set and to investigate existence of pleiotropic genes for testis weight and testis gene expression levels in house mouse. The analyses included relative testis weight and testis gene expression traits. The results showed that two stage model had higher power to detect the pleiotropic QTL than the single marker model. It was also noted the possible economical impact of sampling informative individuals for the GWAS analyses by observing genomic trends in the simulated dataset. Two stage model detected 50 and 53 major SNP effects using first and the second principal components. Additive genetic variation explained by chromosome X was found to be 4% for the testis weight.

Özet

Genom tabanlı ilişki analizleri (GTİÇ) kantitatif verimler ile ilgili genleri bulmak için sıklıkla kullanılmaktadır. Farklı fenotipler arasındaki korelasyon pleiotropik genlerce açıklanabilir. Bu araştırmada, pleiotropik GTİÇ'da hem mendelci hem de major etkili genlerin iki aşamalı çoklu lokus modeli sayesinde birlikte kullanılmaları önerilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın ana amacı: bir benzeşim veri seti kullanarak: çoklu lokus yaklaşımın pleiotropik genlerin bulunmasında faydalı olup olmadığının incelenmesi ve bir fare verisetinde bu modeli kullanarak testis ağırlığı ve gen ifadelerinden sorumlu küçük ve major etkili pleiotropik genleri tespit etmektir. Göreceli testis ağırlıkları ve testis gen ifadesi karakterleri incelenmiştir. Sonuçlar iki aşamalı modelin pleiotropik QTL'leri tesbit etmede, tekil işaretleyici modelden daha yüksek güce sahip olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Ek olarak benzeşim veri setlerinin genomik eğilimlerinin incelenmesi: GTİÇ'da bilgi veren bireylerin seçilmesinin daha ekonomik olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Birinci ve ikinci temel bileşenli iki aşamalı model ile 50 ve 53 adet major SNP tesbit edilmiştir.. X kromozomunun, testis ağırlığındaki eklemeli genetik çeşitliliğin %4'ünü açıkladığı bulunmuştur

🔖

Cite This Article

KARACAÖREN, B. (2022). A genomic investigation on hybrid sterility in house mouse using a two stage model. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 65 - Sayı: 4, 387–393. https://ajindex.com/articles/444605

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Boehnke M, Langefeld CD (1998): Genetic association mapping based on discordant sib pairs: the discordant-alleles test. Am J Hum Genet, 62, 950-961
  2. Endelman JB (2011): Ridge regression and other kernels for genomic selection with R package rrBLUP. The Plant Genome, 4, 250-255
  3. Everitt BS, Landau S, Leese M (2001): Cluster Analysis. National Academy Press, Washington, DC 4. Gao H, Zhang T, Wu Y, et al (2014): Multiple-trait genome-wide association study based on principal component analysis for residual covariance matrix. Heredity, 113, 526-532
  4. Gianola D, de los Campos G, Toro, MA, et al (2015). Do molecular markers inform about pleiotropy? Genetics, 201, 23-29
  5. Goddard, ME, Kemper, KE, Macleod, IM, et al (2016): Genetics of complex traits: prediction of phenotype, identification of causal polymorphisms and genetic architecture. In Proc. R. Soc. B, 283, 20160569
  6. Gratten J, Visscher PM (2016): Genetic pleiotropy in complex traits and diseases: implications for genomic medicine. Genom Med, 8, 78
  7. Hartley SW, Monti S, Liu CT, et al (2012): Bayesian methods for multivariate modeling of pleiotropic SNP associations and genetic risk prediction. Front genet, 3, 176
  8. Hill WG (2010): Understanding and using quantitative genetic variation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 365, 73-85
  9. Karacaören B (2016): Investigations on Genetic Architecture of Hairy Loci in Dairy Cattle by Using Single and Whole Genome Regression Approaches. Asian-Australas j anim sci, 29, 938
  10. Karacaören B, de Koning DJ, Velander I, et al (2010): Alternative association analyses on boar taint using discordant sib pairs experimental design. In 9th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Leipzig, Germany. 743 p
  11. Karacaören B. (2012): Some observations for discordant sib pair design using QTL-MAS 2010 dataset. Kafkas Vet Fak Derg, 18, 857-860
  12. Leong W, Sun PY, Edmands S. (2017): Latitudinal clines in temperature and salinity tolerance in tidepool copepods. J. Hered, 109, 71-77
  13. Liu J, Wan X, Ma S, Yang C. (2016): EPS: an empirical Bayes approach to integrating pleiotropy and tissue-specific information for prioritizing risk genes. Bioinformatics, 32, 1856-1864
  14. Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME (2001): Prediction of total genetic value using genome wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157, 1819-1829
  15. Moser G, Lee HS, Hayes BJ, et al (2015): Simultaneous discovery, estimation and p