Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32797113›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Genomic mating as sustainable breeding for Chinese indigenous Ningxiang pigs.

Jun He, Xiao-Lin Wu, Qinghua Zeng, Hao Li, Haiming Ma, Juan Jiang, Guilherme J M Rosa, Daniel Gianola, Richard G Tait, Stewart Bauck

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Gene Editing for Enhanced Swine Production: Current Advances and Prospects.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Genetic and Phenotypic Characteristics of Belted Pig Breeds: A Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Progress in Genomic Mating in Domestic Animals.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jun HeCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha, Hunan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0414-0209
Xiao-Lin WuBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Neogen GeneSeek, Lincoln, NE, United States of America.
Qinghua ZengCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Hao LiBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Neogen GeneSeek, Lincoln, NE, United States of America.
Haiming MaCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Juan JiangCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Guilherme J M RosaDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Daniel GianolaDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Richard G TaitBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Neogen GeneSeek, Lincoln, NE, United States of America.
Stewart BauckBiostatistics and Bioinformatics, Neogen GeneSeek, Lincoln, NE, United States of America.
Hunan Agricultural University · CNNeogen (United States) · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An important economic reason for the loss of local breeds is that they tend to be less productive, and hence having less market value than commercial breeds. Nevertheless, local breeds often have irreplaceable values, genetically and sociologically. In the breeding programs with local breeds, it is crucial to balance the selection for genetic gain and the maintaining of genetic diversity. These two objectives are often conflicting, and finding the optimal point of the trade-off has been a challenge for breeders. Genomic selection (GS) provides a revolutionary tool for the genetic improvement of farm animals. At the same time, it can increase inbreeding and produce a more rapid depletion of genetic variability of the selected traits in future generations. Optimum-contribution selection (OCS) represents an approach to maximize genetic gain while constraining inbreeding within a targeted range. In the present study, 515 Ningxiang pigs were genotyped with the Illumina Porcine SNP60 array or the GeneSeek Genomic Profiler Porcine 50K array. The Ningxiang pigs were found to be highly inbred at the genomic level. Average locus-wise inbreeding coefficients were 0.41 and 0.37 for the two SNP arrays used, whereas genomic inbreeding coefficients based on runs of homozygosity were 0.24 and 0.25, respectively. Simulated phenotypic data were used to assess the utility of genomic OCS (GOCS) in comparison with GS without inbreeding control. GOCS was conducted under two scenarios, selecting sires only (GOCS_S) or selecting sires and dams (GOCS_SD), while kinships were constrained on selected parents. The genetic gain for average daily body weight gain (ADG) per generation was between 18.99 and 20.55 g with GOCS_S, and between 23.20 and 28.92 with GOCS_SD, and it varied from 25.38 to 48.38 g under GS without controlling inbreeding. While the rate of genetic gain per generation obtained using GS was substantially larger than that obtained by the two scenarios of genomic OCS in the beginning generations of selection, the difference in the genetic gain of ADG between GS and GOCS reduced quickly in latter generations. At generation ten, the difference in the realized rates of genetic gain between GS and GOCS_SD diminished and ended up with even a slightly higher genetic gain with GOCS_SD, due to the rapid loss of genetic variance with GS and fixation of causative genes. The rate of inbreeding was mostly maintained below 5% per generation with genomic OCS, whereas it increased to between 10.5% and 15.3% per generation with GS. Therefore, genomic OCS appears to be a sustainable strategy for the genetic improvement of local breeds such as Ningxiang pigs, but keeping mind that a variety of GOCS methods exist and the optimal forms remain to be exploited further.

Indexed as

InbreedingSelection, GeneticAnimalsFemaleGenomicsHomozygoteMalePhenotypeSwine

Identifiers

PMID32797113
PMCPMC7428355
OpenAlexW3049218659

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.