ArticleBMC genomics2024
Integrated analysis of the DNA methylome and RNA transcriptome during the development of skeletal muscle in Duroc pigs.
Article in BMC genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exposure to electronic cigarette aerosols triggers alterations in genomic DNA methylation that impacts cancer pathways in mice.Inhalation toxicology · 2026Article
- Integrated analysis of DNA methylome and transcriptome of the backfat and longissimus dorsi muscle of Chinese-European hybrid pigs.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Multi-Omics Integration Reveals Key Genes, Metabolites and Pathways Underlying Meat Quality and Intramuscular Fat Deposition Differences Between Tibetan Pigs and Duroc × Tibetan Crossbred Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Photoperiodic responsiveness in the DNA methylation and gene expression in the hypothalamus of ovariectomized and estradiol-treated ewes.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSkeletal muscle development plays a crucial role in yield and quality of pork; however, this process is influenced by various factors. In this study, we employed whole-genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) and transcriptome sequencing to comprehensively investigate the longissimus dorsi muscle (LDM), aiming to identify key genes that impact the growth and development of Duroc pigs with different average daily gains (ADGs).
resultsEight pigs were selected and divided into two groups based on ADGs: H (774.89 g) group and L (658.77 g) group. Each pair of the H and L groups were half-siblings. The results of methylation sequencing revealed 2631 differentially methylated genes (DMGs) involved in metabolic processes, signalling, insulin secretion, and other biological activities. Furthermore, a joint analysis was conducted on these DMGs and the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) obtained from transcriptome sequencing of the same individual. This analysis identified 316 differentially methylated and differentially expressed genes (DMEGs), including 18 DMEGs in promoter regions and 294 DMEGs in gene body regions. Finally, LPAR1 and MEF2C were selected as candidate genes associated with muscle development. Bisulfite sequencing PCR (BSP) and quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) revealed that the promoter region of LPAR1 exhibited significantly lower methylation levels (P < 0.05) and greater expression levels (P < 0.05) in the H group than in the L group. Additionally, hypermethylation was observed in the gene body region of MEF2C, as was a low expression level, in the H group (P < 0.05).
conclusionsThese results suggest that the differences in the ADGs of Duroc pigs fed the same diet may be influenced by the methylation levels and expression levels of genes related to skeletal muscle development.
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.