A genome-wide investigation of insidious uveitis in Appaloosa horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Equine recurrent uveitis (ERU), an inflammatory eye disease, is the leading cause of blindness among horses. Insidious uveitis, a form of ERU, is especially pervasive within the Appaloosa breed and is highly heritable (h2 = 0.68-1.0). To date only one risk locus, leopard complex (LP), has been identified, and it explained 0.16–0.33 of the heritability estimate, suggesting that insidious uveitis is a complex genetic disease within the Appaloosa horse breed with multiple unknown predisposing loci. Results A genome-wide association study (GWAS) using relatedness, LP genotype, sex, and age as covariates was performed on a sample of 96 Appaloosas (36 cases and 60 controls) and identified a 9.7 Kb region of association on ECA X (chrX:14528106–14537812) as significantly associated (P = 2.11 × 10−8). Sex stratification followed by meta-analysis provided additional support for the association on ECA X (P = 1.35 × 10−8). A logistic regression model was performed to test for epistasis between LP and the locus on ECA X, and the results did not support an interaction between the two loci. In the second phase of the study, single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) were identified in the region on ECA X by whole genome sequencing (WGS) of 18 horses from the GWAS (9 cases and 9 controls). Five reference markers from the GWAS, two previously associated coat color loci (LP and PATN1), and 102 SNVs were further evaluated in a combined dataset of 157 horses (70 cases and 87 controls, including the original 96 horses from the GWAS). Using logistic regression, none of the SNVs identified from the WGS analysis were significantly associated with phenotype; however, LP and the top three SNP markers from ECA X (ECA X: 14.5 Mb) were significantly associated in the larger dataset (PLP = 2.34 × 10−6 and PX = 4.06 × 10−5). Conclusion In addition to the LP locus, our investigation identified a locus on chromosome X with a significant association to insidious uveitis in Appaloosas. Replication testing in an independent cohort is necessary to determine if this locus is indeed a causal risk locus.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".