Short copy number variations potentially associated with tonic immobility responses in newly hatched chicks

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 11, 2013, Pages

  Abe, Hideaki ^a,b   Nagao, Kenji ^c   Inoue Murayama, Miho ^a  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^c Aichi Ken Agricultural Research Center   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; CHICKEN; COPY NUMBER VARIATION; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS; TONIC IMMOBILITY;

ANIMALS; CHICKENS; DNA COPY NUMBER VARIATIONS; GENETIC ASSOCIATION STUDIES; IMMOBILITY RESPONSE, TONIC; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCI;

EID: 84894253503     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0080205     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Jones RB (1986) The tonic immobility reaction of the domestic fowl: A review. World's Poult Sci J 42: 82-96.
2. Maser JD, Gallup GG, Jr. (1974) Tonic immobility in the chicken: Catalepsy potentiation by uncontrollable shock and alleviation by imipramine. Psychosom Med 36: 199-205.
3. Kujiyat SK, Craig JV, Dayton AD (1983) Duration of tonic immobility affected by housing environment in White Leghorn hens. Poult Sci 62: 2280-2282.
4. Webster DG, Lanthorn TH, Dewsbury DA, Meyer ME (1981) Tonic immobility and the dorsal immobility response in twelve species of muroid rodents. Behav Neural Biol 31: 32-41.
5. Cashner FM, Olson RD, Erickson DG, Olson GA (1981) Effects of MIF-I and sex differences on tonic immobility duration in the lizard, Anolis carolinensis. Peptides 2 Suppl 1: 161-165. (Pubitemid 12232337)
6. Erhard HW, Mendl M, Christiansen SB (1999) Individual differences in tonic immobility may reflect behavioural strategies. Appl Anim Behav Sci 64: 31-46. (Pubitemid 29245256)
7. Schtz KE, Kerje S, Jacobsson L, Forkman B, Carlborg Ö, et al. (2004) Major growth QTLs in fowl are related to fearful behavior: possible genetic links between fear responses and production traits in a red junglefowl x white leghorn intercross. Behav Genet 34: 121-130. (Pubitemid 38141758)
8. Wirén A, Jensen P (2010) A growth QTL on chicken chromosome 1 affects emotionality and sociality. Behav Genet 41: 303-311.
9. Campler M, Jöngren M, Jensen P (2009) Fearfulness in red junglefowl and domesticated White Leghorn chickens. Behav Processes 81: 39-43.
10. Abe H, Nagao K, Nakamura A, Inoue-Murayama M (2013) Differences in responses to repeated fear-relevant stimuli between Nagoya and White Leghorn chicks. Behav Process 99: 95-99.
11. Kerje S, Carlborg O, Jacobsson L, Schütz K, Hartmann C, et al. (2003) The twofold difference in adult size between the red junglefowl and White Leghorn chickens is largely explained by a limited number of QTLs. Anim Genet 34: 264-274. (Pubitemid 36946722)
12. Banerjee S, Oldridge D, Poptsova M, Hussain WM, Chakravarty D, et al. (2011) A computational framework discovers new copy number variants with functional importance. PLoS One 6: e17539.
13. Wain LV, Armour JA, Tobin MD (2009) Genomic copy number variation, human health, and disease. Lancet 374: 340-350.
14. Wright D, Boije H, Meadows JR, Bed'hom B, Gourichon D, et al. (2009) Copy number variation in intron 1 of SOX5 causes the Pea-comb phenotype in chickens. PLoS Genet 5: e1000512.
15. Nakamura A, Noda K (2001) Breeding history and genetic characters of Nagoya breed, a Japanese poultry breed of Aichi prefecture. Surv Rep Anim Genet Resour 12: 77-97 (In Japanese).
16. Greshock J, Feng B, Nogueira C, Ivanova E, Perna I, et al. (2007) A comparison of DNA copy number profiling platforms. Cancer Res 67: 10173-10180. (Pubitemid 350070789)
17. Baumbusch LO, Aaroe J, Johansen FE, Hicks J, Sun H, et al. (2008) Comparison of the Agilent, ROMA/NimbleGen and Illumina platforms for classification of copy number alterations in human breast tumors. BMC Genomics 9: 379.
18. Pinto D, Darvishi K, Shi X, Rajan D, Rigler D, et al. (2011) Comprehensive assessment of array-based platforms and calling algorithms for detection of copy number variants. Nat Biotechnol 29: 512-520.
19. Fadista J, Nygaard M, Holm LE, Thomsen B, Bendixen C (2008) A snapshot of CNVs in the pig genome. PLoS One 3: e3916.
20. Conrad DF, Bird C, Blackburne B, Lindsay S, Mamanova L, et al. (2010) Mutation spectrum revealed by breakpoint sequencing of human germline CNVs. Nat Genet 42: 385-391.
21. Barrett T, Troup DB, Wilhite SE, Ledoux P, Rudnev D, et al. (2009) NCBI GEO: archive for high-throughput functional genomic data. Nucleic Acids Res 37: D885-890.
22. Rozen S, Skaletsky H (2000) Primer3 on the WWW for general users and for biologist programmers. Methods Mol Biol 132: 365-386.
23. Sherwin CM, Christiansen SB, Duncan IJ, Erhard HW, Lay DC, et al. (2003) Guidelines for the ethical use of animals in applied ethology studies. Appl Anim Behav Sci 81: 291-305. (Pubitemid 36238273)
24. Wang X, Nahashon S, Feaster TK, Bohannon-Stewart A, Adefope N (2010) An initial map of chromosomal segmental copy number variations in the chicken. BMC Genomics 11: 351.
25. Craig JV, Kujiyat SK, Dayton AD (1984) Tonic immobility responses of white leghorn hens affected by induction techniques and genetic stock differences. Poult Sci 63: 1-10.
26. Albentosa MJ, Kjaer JB, Nicol CJ (2003) Strain and age differences in behaviour, fear response and pecking tendency in laying hens. Br Poult Sci 44: 333-344. (Pubitemid 37418120)
27. Wallis JW, Aerts J, Groenen MA, Crooijmans RP, Layman D, et al. (2004) A physical map of the chicken genome. Nature 432: 761-764. (Pubitemid 39656296)
28. Fumihito A, Miyake T, Sumi S, Takada M, Ohno S, et al. (1994) One subspecies of the red junglefowl (Gallus gallus gallus) suffices as the matriarchic ancestor of all domestic breeds. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 91: 12505-12509.
29. Sawai H, Kim HL, Kuno K, Suzuki S, Gotoh H, et al. (2010) The origin and genetic variation of domestic chickens with special reference to junglefowls Gallus g. gallus and G. varius. PLoS One 5: e10639.
30. Tadano R, Nakamura A, Kino K (2012) Analysis of genetic divergence between closely related lines of chickens. Poult Sci 91: 327-333.
31. Heiblum R, Aizenstein O, Gvaryahu G, Voet H, Robinzon B, et al. (1998) Tonic immobility and open field responses in domestic fowl chicks during the first week of life. Appl Anim Behav Sci 60: 347-357. (Pubitemid 28537160)
32. Ghareeb K (2010) Presence of males within laying hens affects tonic immobility response and sociality. Int J Poult Sci 9: 1087-1091.
33. Obukhov AG, Nowycky MC (2002) TRPC4 can be activated by G-protein-coupled receptors and provides sufficient Ca(2+) to trigger exocytosis in neuroendocrine cells. J Biol Chem 277: 16172-16178. (Pubitemid 34967905)
34. Illig KR, Rasmus KC, Varnell AL, Ostertag EM, Klipec WD, et al. (2011) TRPC4 ion channel protein is selectively expressed in a subpopulation of dopamine neurons in the ventral tegmental area. Available from Nature Precedings 〈http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/npre.2011.6577.1〉.
35. Wang X, Herberg FW, Laue MM, Wullner C, Hu B, et al. (2000) Neurobeachin: A protein kinase A-anchoring, beige/Chediak-higashi protein-molog implicated in neuronal membrane traffic. J Neurosci 20: 8551-8565.
36. Medrihan L, Rohlmann A, Fairless R, Andrae J, Döring M, et al. (2009) Neurobeachin, a protein implicated in membrane protein traffic and autism, is required for the formation and functioning of central synapses. J Physiol 587: 5095-5106.
37. Persico AM, Bourgeron T (2006) Searching for ways out of the autism maze: genetic, epigenetic and environmental clues. Trends Neurosci 29: 349-358. (Pubitemid 44108247)