Detection and characterization of copy number variation in three differentially-selected Nellore cattle populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Nellore cattle ( Bos taurus indicus ) is the main beef cattle breed raised in Brazil. This breed is well adapted to tropical conditions and, more recently, has experienced intensive genetic selection for multiple performance traits. Over the past 43 years, an experimental breeding program has been developed in the Institute of Animal Science (IZ, Sertaozinho, SP, Brazil), which resulted in three differentially-selected lines known as Nellore Control (NeC), Nellore Selection (NeS), and Nellore Traditional (NeT). The primary goal of this selection experiment was to determine the response to selection for yearling weight (YW) and residual feed intake (RFI) on Nellore cattle. The main objectives of this study were to: 1) identify copy number variation (CNVs) in Nellore cattle from three selection lines; 2) identify and characterize CNV regions (CNVR) on these three lines; and 3) perform functional enrichment analyses of the CNVR identified. Results: A total of 14,914 unique CNVs and 1,884 CNVRs were identified when considering all lines as a single population. The CNVRs were non-uniformly distributed across the chromosomes of the three selection lines included in the study. The NeT line had the highest number of CNVRs ( n = 1,493), followed by the NeS ( n = 823) and NeC ( n = 482) lines. The CNVRs covered 23,449,890 bp (0.94%), 40,175,556 bp (1.61%), and 63,212,273 bp (2.54%) of the genome of the NeC, NeS, and NeT lines, respectively. Two CNVRs were commonly identified between the three lines, and six, two, and four exclusive regions were identified for NeC, NeS, and NeT, respectively. All the exclusive regions overlap with important genes, such as SMARCD3 , SLC15A1 , and MAPK1 . Key biological processes associated with the candidate genes were identified, including pathways related to growth and metabolism. Conclusion: This study revealed large variability in CNVs and CNVRs across three Nellore lines differentially selected for YW and RFI. Gene annotation and gene ontology analyses of the exclusive CNVRs to each line revealed specific genes and biological processes involved in the expression of growth and feed efficiency traits. These findings contribute to the understanding of the genetic mechanisms underlying the phenotypic differences among the three Nellore selection lines.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".