4.7 Review

A robust linkage map of the porcine autosomes based on gene-associated SNPs

期刊

BMC GENOMICS
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-10-134

关键词

-

资金

  1. Danish Meat Association
  2. Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Genetic linkage maps are necessary for mapping of mendelian traits and quantitative trait loci (QTLs). To identify the actual genes, which control these traits, a map based on gene-associated single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers is highly valuable. In this study, the SNPs were genotyped in a large family material comprising more than 5,000 piglets derived from 12 Duroc boars crossed with 236 Danish Landrace/Danish Large White sows. The SNPs were identified in sequence alignments of 4,600 different amplicons obtained from the 12 boars and containing coding regions of genes derived from expressed sequence tags (ESTs) and genomic shotgun sequences. Results: Linkage maps of all 18 porcine autosomes were constructed based on 456 gene-associated and six porcine EST-based SNPs. The total length of the averaged-sex whole porcine autosome was estimated to 1,711.8 cM resulting in an average SNP spacing of 3.94 cM. The female and male maps were estimated to 2,336.1 and 1,441.5 cM, respectively. The gene order was validated through comparisons to the cytogenetic and/or physical location of 203 genes, linkage to evenly spaced microsatellite markers as well as previously reported conserved synteny. A total of 330 previously unmapped genes and ESTs were mapped to the porcine autosome while ten genes were mapped to unexpected locations. Conclusion: The linkage map presented here shows high accuracy in gene order. The pedigree family network as well as the large amount of meiotic events provide good reliability and make this map suitable for QTL and association studies. In addition, the linkage to the RH-map of microsatellites makes it suitable for comparison to other QTL studies.

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