ArticleAsian-Australasian journal of animal sciences2016
Genetic Diversity Analysis of South and East Asian Duck Populations Using Highly Polymorphic Microsatellite Markers.
Article in Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Whole-genome resequencing identifies adaptive variation associated with complex terrain in southwestern Chinese ducks.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Genetic Diversity and Population Structure Analysis of Seven Duck Populations of Bangladesh Using Microsatellite Markers.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Genetic diversity and population structure of Mongolian regional horses with 14 microsatellite markers.Animal bioscience · 2022Article
- Development of Microsatellite Marker System to Determine the Genetic Diversity of Experimental Chicken, Duck, Goose, and Pigeon Populations.BioMed research international · 2021Article
- Isolation and characterization of 20 polymorphic microsatellites loci for Xenocypris davidi based on high-throughput sequencing.Molecular biology reports · 2020Article
- Monitoring of genetically close Tsaiya duck populations using novel microsatellite markers with high polymorphism.Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences · 2020Article
- Effects of transport stress on physiological responses and milk production in lactating dairy cows.Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences · 2019Article
- Genetic diversity and phylogenetic relationship analyzed by microsatellite markers in eight Indonesian local duck populations.Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Native duck populations have lower productivity, and have not been developed as much as commercials duck breeds. However, native ducks have more importance in terms of genetic diversity and potentially valuable economic traits. For this reason, population discriminable genetic markers are needed for conservation and development of native ducks. In this study, 24 highly polymorphic microsatellite (MS) markers were investigated using commercial ducks and native East and South Asian ducks. The average polymorphic information content (PIC) value for all MS markers was 0.584, indicating high discrimination power. All populations were discriminated using 14 highly polymorphic MS markers by genetic distance and phylogenetic analysis. The results indicated that there were close genetic relationships among populations. In the structure analysis, East Asian ducks shared more haplotypes with commercial ducks than South Asian ducks, and they had more independent haplotypes than others did. These results will provide useful information for genetic diversity studies in ducks and for the development of duck traceability systems in the market.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.