Isolation,Cloning and Sequence Analysis of Differentially Expressed Genes in the Backfat Tissue between Hybrids and Parents in Pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to reveal molecular basis of heterosis, Large White (LW), an introduced European pig breed, and Meishan (MS), a Chinese indigenous pig breed, were selected to hybridize directly and reciprocally in the present experiment. mRNA differential display (DD) technique was performed to identify genes that were differentially expressed among backfat tissues of hybrids (LW×MS, MS×LW) and purebred (LW×LW, MS×MS) pigs. The 10 anchor primers in combination with ten arbitrary primers (100 sets in total) were used and nearly 1 500 reproducible bands were observed in polyacrylamide gel. The 40 differentially displayed bands were selected to clone and sequence. The 36 out of 40 ESTs were proved to be novel and the sequences were submitted to GenBank(accession No. CV507051~CV507087), and the other 4 showed similarity to known genes published in GenBank. Three among 36 novel ESTs were chosen for further identification with semi-quantitative RT-PCR. The result showed that 2 ESTs were differentially expressed, and the 3rd showed no obvious difference between hybrids and purebreds. In order to reduce the percentage of false positive of DD, RNA pools of four types of pigs were constructed respectively by mixing 6 samples from 6 pigs of the same genotype, and subjected to DD. Stringent annealing temperature was applied and only bands that could be repeated in duplicate PCR were used for further study. The results showed that the expression pattern of these 36 ESTs differed among the 4 genotypes of pigs, suggesting that the genes corresponding to these differentially expressed ESTs might be related to the formation of heterosis of fat tissue.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".