| QTL Map Information |
|---|
| Chromosome: | 2 |
| QTL Peak Location: | n/a |
| QTL Span: | n/a
35.5-35.5 (Mbp) |
 |
Upper, "Suggestive": | n/a |
| Upper, "Significant": | n/a |
| Peak: | rs739605797 |
| Lower, "Significant": | n/a |
| Lower, "Suggestive": | n/a |
| Marker type: | SNP |
| Analysis type: | Association |
| Model tested: | n/a |
| Test base: | Comparison-wise |
| Threshold significance level: | Significant |
 |
P_values | 1.039E-06 | | Dominance effect: | n/a |
| Additive effect: | n/a |
| Associated Gene: | n/a |
| Cis/Trans acting type: |  |
| Links:
Edit |
Map view
|
| Extended information: |
|---|
| (none) |
User inputs on QTL #219784
Add your annotations
Add your comments
Report problems
|
| QTL Experiment in Brief |
|---|
| Animals: | Birds were from two different populations of layers, derived from White Leghorn and divergently selected for feather pecking. One population was an F2 design, and the other was a half-sib design. |
| Breeds associated:
|
| Design: | Birds were genotyped using an Illumina 60k SNP chip, with data imputed to full sequence, and analyzed for feather-pecking behavior. A total of 6,898,216 variants were included in the meta-analysis. |
| Analysis: | GWAS were performed for the half-sib and F2 populations separately, as well as combined in a meta-analysis. |
| Software: | GATK, Beagle 5.0, GCTA v.1.92.3 beta3, METAL v1.1 |
| Notes: | |
| Links: | Edit |
| Reference |
|---|
| Authors: | Falker-Gieske C, Iffland H, Preuß S, Bessei W, Drögemüller C, Bennewitz J, Tetens J |
| Affiliation: | Center for Integrated Breeding Research, Georg-August-University, Albrecht-Thaer-Weg 3, 37075, Göttingen, Germany |
| Title: | Meta-analyses of genome wide association studies in lines of laying hens divergently selected for feather pecking using imputed sequence level genotypes |
| Journal: | BMC genetics, 2020, 21(1): 114 |
| Links: |
PubMed | Abstract | List all data
| Edit |
| Additional Information |
|---|
| Comments: | feather pecks delivered |
User inputs on reference #33004014
Add your comments
Note similar findings
Note contradictions
|
