Detection and Visualization of Heterozygosity-Rich Regions and Runs of Homozygosity in Worldwide Sheep Populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we chose 17 worldwide sheep populations of eight breeds, which were intensively selected for different purposes (meat, milk, or wool), or locally-adapted breeds, in order to identify and characterize factors impacting the detection of runs of homozygosity (ROH) and heterozygosity-rich regions (HRRs) in sheep. We also applied a business intelligence (BI) tool to integrate and visualize outputs from complementary analyses. We observed a prevalence of short ROH, and a clear distinction between the ROH profiles across populations. The visualizations showed a fragmentation of medium and long ROH segments. Furthermore, we tested different scenarios for the detection of HRR and evaluated the impact of the detection parameters used. Our findings suggest that HRRs are small and frequent in the sheep genome; however, further studies with higher density SNP chips and different detection methods are suggested for future research. We also defined ROH and HRR islands and identified common regions across the populations, where genes related to a variety of traits were reported, such as body size, muscle development, and brain functions. These results indicate that such regions are associated with many traits, and thus were under selective pressure in sheep breeds raised for different purposes. Interestingly, many candidate genes detected within the HRR islands were associated with brain integrity. We also observed a strong association of high linkage disequilibrium pattern with ROH compared with HRR, despite the fact that many regions in linkage disequilibrium were not located in ROH regions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".