Genomic analysis reveals selection for Asian genes in European pigs following human-mediated introgression

Nature Communications

Volumn 5, Issue , 2014, Pages

  Bosse, Mirte ^a   Megens, Hendrik Jan ^a   Frantz, Laurent A F ^a   Madsen, Ole ^a   Larson, Greger ^b   Paudel, Yogesh ^a   Duijvesteijn, Naomi ^a,c   Harlizius, Barbara ^c   Hagemeijer, Yanick ^a   Crooijmans, Richard P M A ^a   Groenen, Martien A M ^a  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c TOPIGS Research Center IPG   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AROMATIC HYDROCARBON RECEPTOR; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE 20; DNA METHYLTRANSFERASE 3A; INSULIN LIKE GROWTH FACTOR 2 BINDING PROTEIN 1; KIF18A PROTEIN; NRG1 PROTEIN; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR; PROTEIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ARTICLE; FERTILITY; GENE LOCUS; GENE MUTATION; GENOMICS; HAPLOTYPE; INTROGRESSION; NONHUMAN; SWINE; ANIMAL; ASIA; EUROPE; GENETICS; HUMAN; PIG; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALS; ASIA; EUROPE; FERTILITY; GENOMICS; HAPLOTYPES; HUMANS; SWINE;

EID: 84904497026     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5392     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Boyko, A. R. et al. A simple genetic architecture underlies morphological variation in dogs. PLoS Biol. 8, e1000451 (2010).
2. vonHoldt, B. M. et al. Genome-wide SNP and haplotype analyses reveal a rich history underlying dog domestication. Nature 464, 898-902 (2010).
3. Diamond, J. Evolution, consequences and future of plant and animal domestication. Nature 418, 700-707 (2002).
4. Miao, Y.-W. et al. Chicken domestication: an updated perspective based on mitochondrial genomes. Heredity 110, 277-282 (2012).
5. Sweeney, M. T. et al. Global dissemination of a single mutation conferring white pericarp in rice. PLoS Genet. 3, e133 (2007).
6. Eriksson, J. et al. Identification of the yellow skin gene reveals a hybrid origin of the domestic chicken. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000010 (2008).
7. Frantz, L. A. F. et al. Genomic sequencing provides fine scale inference of evolutionary history. Genome Biol. 2013, R107 (2013).
8. Meijaard, E., d'Huart, J.P. & Oliver, W.L.R. in: Handbook of the Mammals of the World Vol 2 (eds Wilson, DE. & Mittermeier, R.A.) 248-291 (Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain, pp, 2011).
9. Larson, G. et al. Worldwide phylogeography of wild boar reveals multiple centers of pig domestication. Science 307, 1618-1621 (2005).
10. Megens, H. J. et al. Biodiversity of pig breeds from China and Europe estimated from pooled DNA samples: differences in microsatellite variation between two areas of domestication. Genet. Sel. Evol. 40, 103-128 (2008).
11. Groenen, M. A. M. et al. Analyses of pig genomes provide insight into porcine demography and evolution. Nature 491, 393-398 (2012).
12. Giuffra, E. et al. The origin of the domestic pig: independent domestication and subsequent introgression. Genetics 154, 1785-1791 (2000).
13. Goedbloed, D. et al. Genome-wide SNP analysis reveals recent genetic introgression from domestic pigs into Northwest European wild boar populations. Mol. Ecol. 22, 856-866 (2013).
14. White, S. From globalized pig breeds to capitalist pigs: a study in animals cultures and evolutionary history. Environ. Hist. 16, 94-120 (2011).
15. Jones, G. F. in The Genetics of the Pig (eds Ruvinsky, A. & Rothschild, M. F.) 17-50 (CAB International, Oxon, UK, 1998).
16. Rubin, C.-J. et al. Strong signatures of selection in the domestic pig genome. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 19529-19536 (2012).
17. Wilkinson, S. et al. Signatures of diversifying selection in european pig breeds. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003453 (2013).
18. Okumura, N., Matsumoto, T., Hamasima, N. & Awata, T. Single nucleotide polymorphisms of the KIT and KITLG genes in pigs. Anim. Sci. J. 79, 303-313 (2008).
19. Ojeda, A. et al. Selection in the making: a worldwide survey of haplotypic diversity around a causative mutation in porcine IGF2. Genetics 178, 1639-1652 (2008).
20. Weir, B. S. & Cockerham, C. C. Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38, 1358 (1984).
21. Green, R. E. et al. A draft sequence of the Neandertal genome. Science 328, 710-722 (2010).
22. Sabeti, P. C. et al. Detecting recent positive selection in the human genome from haplotype structure. Nature 419, 832-837 (2002).
23. Liu, Y. G. & Xia, X. H. Molecular characterization, polymorphism and association with reproductive traits of porcine CDK20 gene. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 20, 566-574 (2011).
24. Seo, H., Kim, M., Choi, Y. & Ka, H. Salivary lipocalin is uniquely expressed in the uterine endometrial glands at the time of conceptus implantation and induced by interleukin-1beta in pigs. Biol. Reprod. 84, 279-287 (2011).
25. Tortereau, F. et al. A high density recombination map of the pig reveals a correlation between sex-specific recombination and GC content BMC. Genomics 13, 586 (2012).
26. Bosse, M. et al. Regions of homozygosity in the porcine genome: Consequence of demography and the recombination landscape. PLoS Genet. 8, e1003100 (2012).
27. Tang, K., Thornton, K. R. & Stoneking, M. A new approach for using genome scans to detect recent positive selection in the human genome. Plos Biol. 7, e171 (2007).
28. Chen, C. et al. Cloning, mapping and molecular characterization of porcine progesterone receptor membrane component 2 (PGRMC2) gene. Genet. Mol. Biol. 33, 471-474 (2010).
29. Ramos, A. M. et al. Design of a high density SNP genotyping assay in the pig using SNPs identified and characterized by next generation sequencing technology. PLoS ONE 4, e6524 (2009).
30. Gitelman, I. Evolution of the vertebrate twist family and synfunctionalization: a mechanism for differential gene loss through merging of expression domains. Mol. Biol. Evol 24, 1912-1925 (2007).
31. Hernández-Ochoa, I., Karman, B. N. & Flaws, J. A. The role of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor in the female reproductive system. Biochem. Pharmacol. 11, 547-559 (2009).
32. Fujii-Kuriyama, Y. & Kawajiri, K. Molecular mechanisms of the physiological functions of the aryl hydrocarbon (dioxin) receptor, a multifunctional regulator that senses and responds to environmental stimuli. Proc. Jpn Acad. B 86, 40-53 (2010).
33. Denison, M. S., Soshilov, A. A., He, G., DeGroot, D. E. & Zhao, B. Exactly the same but different: Promiscuity and diversity in the molecular mechanisms of action of the aryl hydrocarbon (dioxin) receptor. Toxicol. Sci. 124, 1-22 (2011).
34. Baba, T. et al. Intrinsic function of the aryl hydrocarbon (dioxin) receptor as a key factor in female reproduction. Mol. Cell Biol. 25, 10040-10051 (2005).
35. Pocar, P., Fischer, B., Klonisch, T. & Hombach-Klonisch, S. Molecular interactions of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor and its biological and toxicological relevance for reproduction. Reproduction 129, 379-389 (2005).
36. Jablonska, O. et al. The expression of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor in reproductive and neuroendocrine tissues during the estrous cycle in the pig. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 126, 221-228 (2011).
37. Onteru, S. K. et al. A whole-genome association study for pig reproductive traits. Anim. Genet. 43, 18-26 (2012).
38. Harper, P. A., Wong, J. M. Y., Lam, M. S. M. & Okey, A. B. Polymorphisms in the human AH receptor. Chem. Biol. Interact. 141, 161-187 (2002).
39. Ferrer-Admetlla, A., Liang, M., Korneliussen, T. S. & Nielsen, R. On detecting incomplete soft or hard selective sweeps using haplotype structure. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31, 1275-1291 (2014).
40. Hanenberg, E. H. A. T., Mathur, P. K. & Knol, E. F. Marginal economic values for pig production in different countries. in: 9th World congress on genetics applied to livestock production Leipzig, Germany (2010).
41. Connallon, T. & Clarck, A. G. Antagonistic versus non-antagonistic models of balancing selection: Characterizing the relative timescales and hitchhiking effects of partial selective sweeps. Evolution 67, 908-917 (2013).
42. Kijas, J. M. H. et al. Melanocortin receptor 1 (MC1R) mutations and coat color in pigs. Genetics 150, 1177-1185 (1998).
43. Browning, B. L. & Browning, S. R. A fast, powerful method for detecting identity by descent. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 88, 173-182 (2011).
44. Maere, S., Heymans, K. & Kuiper, M. BiNGO: a Cytoscape plugin to assess overrepresentation of Gene Ontology categories in Biological Networks. Bioinformatics 21, 3448-3449 (2005).
45. Rousset, F. Genepop'007: a complete re-implementation of the genepop software for Windows and Linux. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 8, 103-106 (2008).
46. Durand, E. Y., Patterson, N., Reich, D. & Slatkin, M. Testing for admixture between closely related populations. Mol. Biol. Evol. 28, 2239-2252 (2011).
47. Mulder, H. A., Lidauer, M., Strandén, I., Mäntysaari, E. A., Pool, M.H. & Veerkamp, R.F. MiXBLUP Manual (Animal Breeding and Genomics Centre, Wageningen UR Livestock Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands, 2012).
48. Tier, B. & Meyer, K. Approximating prediction error covariances among additive genetic effects within animals in multiple-trait and random regression models. J. Anim. Breed Genet. 121, 77-89 (2004).
49. Gilmour, A. R. et al. ASReml user guide release 3.0.VSN International Ltd, Hemel Hempstead, UK, 2009).
50. Wang, K., Li, M. & Hakonarson, H. ANNOVAR: Functional annotation of genetic variants from high-throughput sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, e164 (2010).
51. Adzhubei, I. A., Schmidt, S. & Peshkin, L. et al. A method and server for predicting damaging missense mutations. Nat. Methods 7, 248-249 (2010).
52. Ronquist, F. & Huelsenbeck, J. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19, 1572-1574 (2003).
53. Gautier, M. & Vitalis, R. rehh: An R package to detect footprints of selection in genome-wide SNP data from haplotype structure. Bioinformatics 28, 1176-1177 (2012).