PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Currently, diverse minipigs have acquired a common dwarfism phenotype through independent artificial selections. Characterizing the population and genetic diversity in minipigs is important to unveil genetic mechanisms regulating their body sizes and effects of independent artificial selections on those genetic mechanisms. However, full understanding for the genetic mechanisms and phenotypic consequences in minipigs still lag behind.
RESULTS: Here, using whole genome sequencing data of 41 pig breeds, including eight minipigs, we identified a large genomic diversity in a minipig population compared to other pig populations in terms of population structure, demographic signatures, and selective signatures. Selective signatures reveal diverse biological mechanisms related to body size in minipigs. We also found evidence for neural development mechanism as a minipig-specific body size regulator. Interestingly, selection signatures within those mechanisms containing neural development are also highly different among minipig breeds. Despite those large genetic variances, PLAG1, CHM, and ESR1 are candidate key genes regulating body size which experience different differentiation directions in different pig populations.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings present large variances of genetic structures, demographic signatures, and selective signatures in the minipig population. They also highlight how different artificial selections with large genomic diversity have shaped the convergent dwarfism.
RESULTS: Here, using whole genome sequencing data of 41 pig breeds, including eight minipigs, we identified a large genomic diversity in a minipig population compared to other pig populations in terms of population structure, demographic signatures, and selective signatures. Selective signatures reveal diverse biological mechanisms related to body size in minipigs. We also found evidence for neural development mechanism as a minipig-specific body size regulator. Interestingly, selection signatures within those mechanisms containing neural development are also highly different among minipig breeds. Despite those large genetic variances, PLAG1, CHM, and ESR1 are candidate key genes regulating body size which experience different differentiation directions in different pig populations.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings present large variances of genetic structures, demographic signatures, and selective signatures in the minipig population. They also highlight how different artificial selections with large genomic diversity have shaped the convergent dwarfism.
摘要：
背景：目前，不同的小型猪通过独立的人工选择获得了共同的侏儒症表型。表征小型猪的种群和遗传多样性对于揭示调节其体型的遗传机制以及独立人工选择对这些遗传机制的影响很重要。然而,对小型猪的遗传机制和表型后果的充分理解仍然滞后。
结果：这里，使用41个猪品种的全基因组测序数据，包括八只小猪，在种群结构方面，我们发现小型猪种群与其他猪种群相比具有很大的基因组多样性，人口统计签名,选择性签名选择性特征揭示了与小型猪体型相关的多种生物学机制。我们还发现了神经发育机制作为小型猪特异性体型调节剂的证据。有趣的是,这些包含神经发育的机制中的选择特征在小型猪品种之间也有很大差异。尽管遗传变异很大，PLAG1,CHM,和ESR1是调节体型的候选关键基因，在不同猪种群中经历不同的分化方向。
结论：这些发现显示了遗传结构的巨大差异，人口统计签名,以及小型猪种群中的选择性特征。他们还强调了具有大基因组多样性的不同人工选择如何塑造了收敛的侏儒症。
结果：这里，使用41个猪品种的全基因组测序数据，包括八只小猪，在种群结构方面，我们发现小型猪种群与其他猪种群相比具有很大的基因组多样性，人口统计签名,选择性签名选择性特征揭示了与小型猪体型相关的多种生物学机制。我们还发现了神经发育机制作为小型猪特异性体型调节剂的证据。有趣的是,这些包含神经发育的机制中的选择特征在小型猪品种之间也有很大差异。尽管遗传变异很大，PLAG1,CHM,和ESR1是调节体型的候选关键基因，在不同猪种群中经历不同的分化方向。
结论：这些发现显示了遗传结构的巨大差异，人口统计签名,以及小型猪种群中的选择性特征。他们还强调了具有大基因组多样性的不同人工选择如何塑造了收敛的侏儒症。
