Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34134626›Full record

ArticleBMC genomic data2021

Genome-wide DNA methylation analysis in Chinese Chenghua and Yorkshire pigs.

Kai Wang, Pingxian Wu, Shujie Wang, Xiang Ji, Dong Chen, Anan Jiang, Weihang Xiao, Yiren Gu, Yanzhi Jiang, Yangshuang Zeng and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomic data, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Role ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    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

13 authors.

Kai Wang *Farm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Pingxian Wu *Farm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Shujie WangFarm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Xiang JiFarm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Dong ChenFarm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Anan JiangFarm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Weihang XiaoFarm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Yiren GuSichuan Animal Science Academy, Chengdu, 610066, China.
Yanzhi JiangCollege of Life Science, Sichuan Agricultural University, Yaan, China.
Yangshuang ZengSichuan Animal Husbandry Station, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Xu XuSichuan Animal Husbandry Station, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Xuewei LiFarm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Guoqing TangFarm Animal Genetic Resources Exploration and Innovation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China. tyq003@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Chinese Chenghua pig (CHP) is a typical Chinese domestic fatty pig breed with superior meat quality characteristics, while the Yorkshire pig (YP) has the characteristics of fast growth and a high rate of lean meat. Long term natural selection and artificial selection resulted in great phenotypic differences between the two breeds, including growth, development, production performance, meat quality, and coat color. However, genome-wide DNA methylation differences between CHP and YP remain unclear.

resultsDNA methylation data were generated for muscle tissues of CHP and YP using reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS). In this study, a total of 2,416,211 CpG sites were identified. Besides, the genome-wide DNA methylation analysis revealed 722 differentially methylated regions (DMRs) and 466 differentially methylated genes (DMGs) in pairwise CHP vs. YP comparison. Six key genomic regions (Sus scrofa chromosome (SSC)1:253.47-274.23 Mb, SSC6:148.71-169.49 Mb, SSC7:0.25-9.86 Mb, SSC12:43.06-61.49 Mb, SSC14:126.43-140.95 Mb, and SSC18:49.17-54.54 Mb) containing multiple DMRs were identified, and differences of methylation patterns in these regions may be related to phenotypic differences between CHP and YP. Based on the functional analysis of DMGs, 8 DMGs (ADCY1, AGBL4, EXOC2, FUBP3, PAPPA2, PIK3R1, MGMT and MYH8) were considered as important candidate genes associated with muscle development and meat quality traits in pigs.

conclusionsThis study explored the difference in meat quality between CHP and YP from the epigenetic point of view, which has important reference significance for the local pork industry and pork food processing.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationGenomeGenome-Wide Association StudyAnimalsChinaSelection, GeneticSwineChenghua pigDNA methylationRRBSYorkshire pig

Identifiers

PMID34134626
PMCPMC8207654

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.