4.6 Article

Origins of Albino and Hooded Rats: Implications from Molecular Genetic Analysis across Modern Laboratory Rat Strains

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0043059

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [21300153]
  2. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare
  3. Fujiwara Memorial Foundation
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21300153] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Albino and hooded (or piebald) rats are one of the most frequently used laboratory animals for the past 150 years. Despite this fact, the origin of the albino mutation as well as the genetic basis of the hooded phenotype remained unclear. Recently, the albino mutation has been identified as the Arg299His missense mutation in the Tyrosinase gene and the hooded (H) locus has been mapped to the similar to 460-kb region in which only the Kit gene exists. Here, we surveyed 172 laboratory rat strains for the albino mutation and the hooded (h) mutation that we identified by positional cloning approach to investigate possible genetic roots and relationships of albino and hooded rats. All of 117 existing laboratory albino rats shared the same albino missense mutation, indicating they had only one single ancestor. Genetic fine mapping followed by de novo sequencing of BAC inserts covering the H locus revealed that an endogenous retrovirus (ERV) element was inserted into the first intron of the Kit gene where the hooded allele maps. A solitary long terminal repeat (LTR) was found at the same position to the ERV insertion in another allele of the H locus, which causes the so called Irish (h(i)) phenotype. The ERV and the solitary LTR insertions were completely associated with the hooded and Irish coat patterns, respectively, across all colored rat strains examined. Interestingly, all 117 albino rat strains shared the ERV insertion without any exception, which strongly suggests that the albino mutation had originally occurred in hooded rats.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据