4.7 Article

Non-Synonymous Variants in Fat QTL Genes among High- and Low-Milk-Yielding Indigenous Breeds

期刊

ANIMALS
卷 13, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ani13050884

关键词

milk fat; whole-genome sequencing; SNPs; genomic variation; variant calling; indigenous breeds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explores the variations in milk fat content among cattle breeds at the genetic and transcriptional level. The effect of breed on milk components and the presence of fixed SNP patterns in key genes were identified. Pyrosequencing validated the differences in fat QTLs between high- and low-milk-yielding breeds.
Simple Summary Milk fat is a crucial trait that varies significantly among cattle breeds and determines the milk quality and pricing value. Indigenous breeds have disparity in milk quantity and quality. Our study is one of a kind which helps to decipher the variations at the genetic level correlated with transcriptional level among high and low milk-yielding cattle breeds exploring the fat QTLs. We assessed and unveiled a few key differences between the high and low-milk-yield breeds. The effect of breed on milk components-fat, protein, lactose, and water-has been observed to be significant. As fat is one of the major price-determining factors for milk, exploring the variations in fat QTLs across breeds would shed light on the variable fat content in their milk. Here, on whole-genome sequencing, 25 differentially expressed hub or bottleneck fat QTLs were explored for variations across indigenous breeds. Out of these, 20 genes were identified as having nonsynonymous substitutions. A fixed SNP pattern in high-milk-yielding breeds in comparison to low-milk-yielding breeds was identified in the genes GHR, TLR4, LPIN1, CACNA1C, ZBTB16, ITGA1, ANK1, and NTG5E and, vice versa, in the genes MFGE8, FGF2, TLR4, LPIN1, NUP98, PTK2, ZTB16, DDIT3, and NT5E. The identified SNPs were ratified by pyrosequencing to prove that key differences exist in fat QTLs between the high- and low-milk-yielding breeds.

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

4.7
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