4.5 Review

Mutation discovery for Mendelian traits in non-laboratory animals: a review of achievements up to 2012

Journal

ANIMAL GENETICS
Volume 45, Issue 2, Pages 157-170

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/age.12103

Keywords

genome assembly; microsatellite; missense; non-laboratory animals; non-sense; Online Mendelian Inheritance in Animals (OMIA); single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs); SNP chip

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Within two years of the re-discovery of Mendelism, Bateson and Saunders had described six traits in non-laboratory animals (five in chickens and one in cattle) that show single-locus (Mendelian) inheritance. In the ensuing decades, much progress was made in documenting an ever-increasing number of such traits. In 1987 came the first discovery of a causal mutation for a Mendelian trait in non-laboratory animals: a non-sense mutation in the thyroglobulin gene (TG), causing familial goitre in cattle. In the years that followed, the rate of discovery of causal mutations increased, aided mightily by the creation of genome-wide microsatellite maps in the 1990s and even more mightily by genome assemblies and single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) chips in the 2000s. With sequencing costs decreasing rapidly, by 2012 causal mutations were being discovered in non-laboratory animals at a rate of more than one per week. By the end of 2012, the total number of Mendelian traits in non-laboratory animals with known causal mutations had reached 499, which was half the number of published single-locus (Mendelian) traits in those species. The distribution of types of mutations documented in non-laboratory animals is fairly similar to that in humans, with almost half being missense or non-sense mutations. The ratio of missense to non-sense mutations in non-laboratory animals to the end of 2012 was 193:78. The fraction of non-sense mutations (78/271=0.29) was not very different from the fraction of non-stop codons that are just one base substitution away from a stop codon (21/61=0.34).

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