Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27220827›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

High-throughput and Cost-effective Chicken Genotyping Using Next-Generation Sequencing.

Fábio Pértille, Carlos Guerrero-Bosagna, Vinicius Henrique da Silva, Clarissa Boschiero, José de Ribamar da Silva Nunes, Mônica Corrêa Ledur, Per Jensen, Luiz Lehmann Coutinho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Trait Analysis in Domestic Rabbits (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Fourth Report on Chicken Genes and Chromosomes 2022.Cytogenetic and genome research · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. In Search of Species-Specific SNPs in a Non-Model Animal (European Bison (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Fábio PértilleAnimal Biotechnology Laboratory, Animal Science and Pastures Department, University of São Paulo (USP)/Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (ESALQ), Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.
Carlos Guerrero-BosagnaIFM Biology, AVIAN Behavioural Genomics and Physiology Group, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Vinicius Henrique da SilvaAnimal Biotechnology Laboratory, Animal Science and Pastures Department, University of São Paulo (USP)/Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (ESALQ), Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.
Clarissa BoschieroAnimal Biotechnology Laboratory, Animal Science and Pastures Department, University of São Paulo (USP)/Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (ESALQ), Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.
José de Ribamar da Silva NunesAnimal Biotechnology Laboratory, Animal Science and Pastures Department, University of São Paulo (USP)/Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (ESALQ), Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.
Mônica Corrêa LedurBrazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA) Swine &Poultry, Concórdia, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
Per JensenIFM Biology, AVIAN Behavioural Genomics and Physiology Group, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Luiz Lehmann CoutinhoAnimal Biotechnology Laboratory, Animal Science and Pastures Department, University of São Paulo (USP)/Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (ESALQ), Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chicken genotyping is becoming common practice in conventional animal breeding improvement. Despite the power of high-throughput methods for genotyping, their high cost limits large scale use in animal breeding and selection. In the present paper we optimized the CornellGBS, an efficient and cost-effective genotyping by sequence approach developed in plants, for its application in chickens. Here we describe the successful genotyping of a large number of chickens (462) using CornellGBS approach. Genomic DNA was cleaved with the PstI enzyme, ligated to adapters with barcodes identifying individual animals, and then sequenced on Illumina platform. After filtering parameters were applied, 134,528 SNPs were identified in our experimental population of chickens. Of these SNPs, 67,096 had a minimum taxon call rate of 90% and were considered 'unique tags'. Interestingly, 20.7% of these unique tags have not been previously reported in the dbSNP. Moreover, 92.6% of these SNPs were concordant with a previous Whole Chicken-genome re-sequencing dataset used for validation purposes. The application of CornellGBS in chickens showed high performance to infer SNPs, particularly in exonic regions and microchromosomes. This approach represents a cost-effective (~US$50/sample) and powerful alternative to current genotyping methods, which has the potential to improve whole-genome selection (WGS), and genome-wide association studies (GWAS) in chicken production.

Indexed as

AnimalsChickensChromosome MappingCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleGenomeGenome-Wide Association StudyGenotyping TechniquesHeterozygoteHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMaleMolecular Sequence AnnotationPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID27220827
PMCPMC4879531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.