4.5 Article

Nucleotide variability and linkage disequilibrium patterns at the porcine FABP5 gene

Journal

ANIMAL GENETICS
Volume 39, Issue 5, Pages 468-473

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2052.2008.01752.x

Keywords

fatty acid binding protein 5; linkage disequilibrium; nucleotide variability

Funding

  1. Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia (MEC), Spain
  2. MEC, Spain [AGL2004-0103/GAN, BFU2004-02253]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Fatty acid binding protein 5 (FABP5) is a major positional and physiological candidate gene for the porcine FAT1 QTL on SSC4. Here we characterize the nucleotide polymorphism and haplotype variability of FABP5 and we compare it with that of FABP4, given their close physical location and similar metabolic roles. DNA resequencing of the FABP5 gene region in 29 pigs from 14 breeds and in European and Japanese wild boars revealed 36 polymorphisms in 5.2 kb, and a nucleotide diversity of 0.19%, comparable to values reported in other domestic species but sixfold lower than that previously found for FABP4. Remarkably, both the nucleotide variability and the haplotype structure of FABP5 and FABP4 were dramatically different, and the Hudson-Kreitman-Aguade test was highly significant. Nevertheless, both genes also had similarities. The neighbour-joining trees of their haplotypes did not show a geographical arrangement for any of the genes. Besides, both genes presented a similar extent and pattern of linkage disequilibrium. Haplotype blocks did not extend for large stretches (similar to 1 kb in both genes), and the number of tag SNPs required to capture all variability was higher than previously expected. Our findings indicate that FABP4 and FABP5 have undergone different selective or evolutive processes. The fact that haplotype blocks were so small may require us to increase the number of SNPs in prospective whole-genome association studies in the pig.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available