4.5 Article

Molecular characterization of swine leucocyte antigen class I genes in outbred pig populations

期刊

ANIMAL GENETICS
卷 40, 期 4, 页码 468-478

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2052.2009.01860.x

关键词

genotyping; major histocompatibility complex; outbred pigs; PCR-SSP; polymorphism; SLA; SLA diversity; swine leucocyte antigen

资金

  1. USDA/NRI-CSREES [2004-35605-14197]
  2. Korea Research Foundation [KRF-2006-612-F00002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>The highly polymorphic swine leucocyte antigen (SLA) genes are one of the most important determinants in swine immune responses to infectious diseases, vaccines, and in transplantation success. Study of SLA influence requires accurate and effective typing methods. We developed a simple and rapid method to type alleles at the three classical SLA class I loci (SLA-1, SLA-3 and SLA-2) using the PCR-sequence-specific primer (PCR-SSP) strategy. This typing system relies on 47 discriminatory PCR primer pairs designed to amplify the SLA class I alleles by groups that have similar sequence motifs. We applied this low-resolution group-specific typing method to characterize the SLA class I alleles present in three outbred pig populations (n = 202). Alleles from 24 class I allele groups corresponding to 56 class I genotypes were detected. We also identified 23 low-resolution SLA class I haplotypes in these pigs and found haplotypes Lr-1.0 (SLA-1*01XX-SLA-3*01XX-SLA-2*01XX) and Lr-4.0 (SLA-1*04XX-SLA-3*04XX-SLA-2*04XX) in all three pig populations with a high prevalence. Over 80% of the pigs examined (n = 162) were found to bear at least one of these haplotypes, resulting in a combined haplotype frequency of nearly 50%. This PCR-SSP-based typing system demonstrates a reliable and unambiguous detection of SLA class I alleles, and can be used to effectively investigate the SLA diversity in outbred pig populations. It will help to identify the role of SLA antigens in disease-resistant pigs and may facilitate the development of effective vaccines.

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

4.5
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