Integrating large-scale meta-GWAS and PigGTEx resources to decipher the genetic basis of 232 complex traits in pigs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Understanding the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying complex traits in pigs is crucial for enhancing genetic gain via artificial selection and utilizing pigs as models for human disease and biology. Here, we conducted comprehensive genome-wide association studies (GWAS) followed by a cross-breed meta-analysis for 232 complex traits and a within-breed meta-analysis for 12 traits, using 28.3 million imputed sequence variants in 70 328 animals across 14 pig breeds. We identified 6878 quantitative trait loci (QTL) for 139 complex traits. Leveraging the Pig Genotype-Tissue Expression resource, we systematically investigated the biological context and regulatory mechanisms behind these trait-QTLs, ultimately prioritizing 14 829 variant-gene-tissue-trait regulatory circuits. For instance, rs344053754 regulates UGT2B31 expression in the liver and intestines, potentially by modulating enhancer activity, ultimately influencing litter weight at weaning in pigs. Furthermore, we observed conservation of certain genetic and regulatory mechanisms underlying complex traits between humans and pigs. Overall, our cross-breed meta-GWAS in pigs provides invaluable resources and novel insights into the genetic regulatory and evolutionary mechanisms of complex traits in mammals.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it