ArticleHeredity2017
The 'heritability' of domestication and its functional partitioning in the pig.
Article in Heredity, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative genomics of Shiga toxin-producingFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Whole-genome sequencing reveals insights into the adaptation of French Charolais cattle to Cuban tropical conditions.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2021Article
- RAPID COMMUNICATION: A haplotype information theory method reveals genes of evolutionary interest in European vs. Asian pigs.Journal of animal science · 2018Article
- A Pathway-Centered Analysis of Pig Domestication and Breeding in Eurasia.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2017Article
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
Abstract
We propose to estimate the proportion of variance explained by regression on genome-wide markers (or genomic heritability) when wild/domestic status is considered the phenotype of interest. This approach differs from the standard Fst in that it can accommodate genetic similarity between individuals in a general form. We apply this strategy to complete genome data from 47 wild and domestic pigs from Asia and Europe. When we partitioned the total genomic variance into components associated to subsets of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) defined in terms of their annotation, we found that potentially deleterious non-synonymous mutations (9566 SNPs) explained as much genetic variance as the whole set of 25 million SNPs. This suggests that domestication may have affected protein sequence to a larger extent than regulatory or other kinds of mutations. A pathway-guided analysis revealed ovarian steroidogenesis and leptin signaling as highly relevant in domestication. The genomic regression approach proposed in this study revealed molecular processes not apparent through typical differentiation statistics. We propose that at least some of these processes are likely new discoveries because domestication is a dynamic process of genetic selection, which may not be completely characterized by a static metric like Fst. Nevertheless, and despite some particularly influential mutation types or pathways, our analyses tend to rule out a simplistic genetic basis for the domestication process: neither a single pathway nor a unique set of SNPs can explain the process as a whole.
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.