Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27525263›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2016

aCGH Analysis to Estimate Genetic Variations among Domesticated Chickens.

Tomoyoshi Komiyama, Mengjie Lin, Atsushi Ogura

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tomoyoshi KomiyamaDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa 259-1193, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2138-0084
Mengjie LinDepartment of Biology, Ochanomizu University, Tokyo 112-0012, Japan.
Atsushi OguraNagahama Institute of Bio-Science and Technology, Nagahama, Shiga 526-0829, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-5610-9940
Nagahama Institute of Bio-Science and Technology · JPOchanomizu University · JPTokai University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chickens have been familiar to humans since ancient times and have been used not only for culinary purposes but also for cultural purposes including ritual ceremonies and traditional entertainment. The various chicken breeds developed for these purposes often display distinct morphological and/or behavioural traits. For example, the Japanese Shamo is larger and more aggressive than other domesticated chickens, reflecting its role as a fighting cock breed, whereas Japanese Naganakidori breeds, which have long-crowing behaviour, were bred instead for their entertaining and aesthetic qualities. However, the genetic backgrounds of these distinct morphological and behavioural traits remain unclear. Therefore, the question arises as to which genomic regions in these chickens were acted upon by selective pressures through breeding. We compared the entire genomes of six chicken breeds domesticated for various cultural purposes by utilizing array comparative genomic hybridization. From these analyses, we identified 782 regions that underwent insertions, deletions, or mutations, representing man-made selection pressure in these chickens. Furthermore, we found that a number of genes diversified in domesticated chickens bred for cultural or entertainment purposes were different from those diversified in chickens bred for food, such as broilers and layers.

Indexed as

AnimalsBehavior, AnimalBreedingChickensComparative Genomic HybridizationGenetic VariationGenome

Identifiers

PMID27525263
PMCPMC4972930
OpenAlexW2496576292

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.