Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29897548›Full record

ArticleDNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes2018

Highly dense linkage maps from 31 full-sibling families of turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) provide insights into recombination patterns and chromosome rearrangements throughout a newly refined genome assembly.

F Maroso, M Hermida, A Millán, A Blanco, M Saura, A Fernández, G Dalla Rovere, L Bargelloni, S Cabaleiro, B Villanueva and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

F MarosoGENEAQUA S.L, 2007 Lugo, Spain.
M HermidaDepartamento de Zoología, Genética y Antropología Física, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
A MillánGENEAQUA S.L, 2007 Lugo, Spain.
A BlancoDepartamento de Zoología, Genética y Antropología Física, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
M SauraDepartamento de Mejora Genética Animal, Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA), Madrid, Spain.
A FernándezDepartamento de Mejora Genética Animal, Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA), Madrid, Spain.
G Dalla RovereDepartment of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padova, Legnaro, Padova, Italy.
L BargelloniDepartment of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padova, Legnaro, Padova, Italy.
S CabaleiroCluster de Acuicultura de Galicia (Punta do Couso), Aguiño-Ribeira, Spain.
B VillanuevaDepartamento de Mejora Genética Animal, Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA), Madrid, Spain.
C BouzaDepartamento de Zoología, Genética y Antropología Física, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
P MartínezDepartamento de Zoología, Genética y Antropología Física, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela · ESInstituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria · ESUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Highly dense linkage maps enable positioning thousands of landmarks useful for anchoring the whole genome and for analysing genome properties. Turbot is the most important cultured flatfish worldwide and breeding programs in the fifth generation of selection are targeted to improve growth rate, obtain disease resistant broodstock and understand sex determination to control sex ratio. Using a Restriction-site Associated DNA approach, we genotyped 18,214 single nucleotide polymorphism in 1,268 turbot individuals from 31 full-sibling families. Individual linkage maps were combined to obtain a male, female and species consensus maps. The turbot consensus map contained 11,845 markers distributed across 22 linkage groups representing a total normalised length of 3,753.9 cM. The turbot genome was anchored to this map, and scaffolds representing 96% of the assembly were ordered and oriented to obtain the expected 22 megascaffolds according to its karyotype. Recombination rate was lower in males, especially around centromeres, and pairwise comparison of 44 individual maps suggested chromosome polymorphism at specific genomic regions. Genome comparison across flatfish provided new evidence on karyotype reorganisations occurring across the evolution of this fish group.

Indexed as

Chromosome MappingGenetic LinkagePolymorphism, Single NucleotideAnimalsBreedingFemaleFlatfishesGenomicsMaleRecombination, GeneticSequence Analysis, DNASex Determination Processes

Identifiers

PMID29897548
PMCPMC6105115
OpenAlexW2807775305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.