MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408339364 · doi:10.1186/s12864-025-11427-x

Identification of key LncRNAs and mRNAs associated with intramuscular fat in pig via WGCNA

2025· article· en· W4408339364 on OpenAlexaff
Wenqiang Li, Suozhou Yang, Huixin Liu, Zhi Cao, Fei Xu, Chao Ning, Qin Zhang, Dan Wang, Hui Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Genomics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersNational Outstanding Youth Science Fund Project of National Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyIdentification (biology)Computational biologyKey (lock)DNA microarrayGeneticsEvolutionary biologyBioinformaticsGeneGene expressionEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intramuscular fat (IMF) not only directly affects the tenderness, juiciness, and overall flavour of meat but also plays a significant role in influencing consumer preferences for pork. Therefore, exploring key biomarkers that influence IMF deposition is highly important for breeding high-quality pork. IMF is a typical quantitative trait that is regulated by the interaction of multiple coding and noncoding RNAs. Traditional differential analysis methods typically focus on individual genes, making it difficult to identify key genes and their underlying mechanisms accurately. Weighted gene coexpression network analysis (WGCNA) is an efficient and accurate method for identifying and characterizing key pathways and genes associated with complex traits. Therefore, the aim of this study was to construct an mRNA‒lncRNA coexpression network related to IMF using WGCNA to explore and identify potential candidate genes that influence IMF in pigs. RESULTS: Full-length transcriptome sequencing was performed on 31 220-day-old Jiangquan black pigs raised in the same environment, and a gene expression matrix comprising 25,609 genes was constructed. Nine coexpression modules were identified through WGCNA, with the number of genes in these modules ranging from 33 to 3648. The magenta module (corr = 0.7, P < 0.01) and the turquoise module (corr = -0.77, P < 0.01) were significantly associated with IMF deposition. Hub genes in each module were identified on the basis of the screening criteria of GS > 0.4 and MM > 0.8. Combined with enrichment analysis and protein‒protein interaction (PPI) analysis, 18 key mRNAs potentially related to IMF were selected: CRKL, CBL, PDGFRB, DOCK1, YWHAH, HSP90AB1, LOC100524873, NDUFA1, NDUFA11, NDUFA12, NDUFA2, NDUFAB1, NDUFB10, NDUFB3, NDUFB7, NDUFS5, NDUFS6, and UQCR10. To explore the regulatory role of lncRNAs in the process of IMF deposition, we constructed an lncRNA‒mRNA‒pathway network on the basis of the relationships between lncRNAs and key mRNAs, as well as the results of Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment analysis. This network includes four key lncRNAs (TGOLN2, LOC100521518, LOC100524915, and LOC100622481) and predicts the potential mechanisms by which lncRNAs regulate IMF deposition. CONCLUSIONS: Through WGCNA, enrichment analysis, and PPI analysis, 18 mRNAs and four lncRNAs potentially involved in IMF deposition were identified, and the lncRNA regulatory pathways were preliminarily explored. Our findings provide new insights into the regulatory mechanisms of pig IMF deposition and lay the foundation for further exploration of the molecular mechanisms underlying pig fat deposition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GenomicsSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207