Differential expression of <scp>ASIP</scp> transcripts reveals genetic mechanism underpinning black‐tail independence from body plumage in yellow‐bodied chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genetic foundation of chicken body plumage color has been extensively studied. However, little attention has been paid to the inheritance patterns and molecular mechanisms underlying the formation of distal feather colors (tail and wingtip). Differences in these colors are common; for example, the Chinese Huiyang Beard chicken has black tail feathers, but yellow body plumage. Here, the hybrid offspring of Huiyang Beard and White Leghorn chickens were used to study the inheritance patterns of tail-feather color. The expression levels of pigment genes in differently colored feather follicles were analyzed using quantitative real-time PCR. The results showed that genetic regulation of tail-feather color was independent of body-plumage color. The Dominant White locus inhibited eumelanin synthesis in tail feathers without affecting the formation of yellow body plumage, whereas the Silver locus had the opposite effect. The expression of agouti signaling protein (ASIP) gene class 1 transcripts was significantly lower in black tail-feather follicles than in yellow body follicles, whereas tyrosinase-related protein 1 (TYRP1) gene expression was significantly higher in black tail feathers. These differentially expressed genes were confirmed to exert an effect on eumelanin and pheomelanin formation in feathers, thus influencing the regulation of chicken tail-feather color. In conclusion, this study lays the foundation for further research on the genetic mechanisms of regional differences in feather color, contributing to a better understanding of plumage pigmentation in chickens.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".