A meta-analysis of genetic and phenotypic diversity of European local pig breeds reveals genomic regions associated with breed differentiation for production traits.

BACKGROUND: Intense selection of modern pig breeds has resulted in genetic improvement of production traits while the performance of local pig breeds has remained lower. As local pig breeds have been bred in extensive systems, they have adapted to specific environmental conditions, resulting in a rich genotypic and phenotypic diversity. This study is based on European local pig breeds that have been genetically characterized using DNA-pool sequencing data and phenotypically characterized using breed level phenotypes related to stature, fatness, growth, and reproductive performance traits. These data were analyzed using a dedicated approach to detect signatures of selection linked to phenotypic traits in order to uncover potential candidate genes that may underlie adaptation to specific environments. RESULTS: Analysis of the genetic data of European pig breeds revealed four main axes of genetic variation represented by the Iberian and three modern breeds (i.e. Large White, Landrace, and Duroc). In addition, breeds clustered according to their geographical origin, for example French Gascon and Basque breeds, Italian Apulo Calabrese and Casertana breeds, Spanish Iberian, and Portuguese Alentejano breeds. Principal component analysis of the phenotypic data distinguished the larger and leaner breeds with better growth potential and reproductive performance from the smaller and fatter breeds with low growth and reproductive efficiency. Linking the signatures of selection with phenotype identified 16 significant genomic regions associated with stature, 24 with fatness, 2 with growth, and 192 with reproduction. Among them, several regions contained candidate genes with possible biological effects on stature, fatness, growth, and reproductive performance traits. For example, strong associations were found for stature in two regions containing, respectively, the ANXA4 and ANTXR1 genes, for fatness in a region containing the DNMT3A and POMC genes and for reproductive performance in a region containing the HSD17B7 gene. CONCLUSIONS: In this study on European local pig breeds, we used a dedicated approach for detecting signatures of selection that were supported by phenotypic data at the breed level to identify potential candidate genes that may have adapted to different living environments and production systems.

Enhancer/gene relationships: Need for more reliable genome-wide reference sets.

Differences in cells' functions arise from differential activity of regulatory elements, including enhancers. Enhancers are cis-regulatory elements that cooperate with promoters through transcription factors to activate the expression of one or several genes by getting physically close to them in the 3D space of the nucleus. There is increasing evidence that genetic variants associated with common diseases are enriched in enhancers active in cell types relevant to these diseases. Identifying the enhancers associated with genes and conversely, the sets of genes activated by each enhancer (the so-called enhancer/gene or E/G relationships) across cell types, can help understanding the genetic mechanisms underlying human diseases. There are three broad approaches for the genome-wide identification of E/G relationships in a cell type: 1) genetic link methods or eQTL, 2) functional link methods based on 1D functional data such as open chromatin, histone mark or gene expression and 3) spatial link methods based on 3D data such as HiC. Since 1) and 3) are costly, the current strategy is to develop functional link methods and to use data from 1) and 3) as reference to evaluate them. However, there is still no consensus on the best functional link method to date, and method comparison remain seldom. Here, we compared the relative performances of three recent methods for the identification of enhancer-gene links, TargetFinder, Average-Rank, and the ABC model, using the three latest benchmarks from the field: a reference that combines 3D and eQTL data, called BENGI, and two genetic screening references, called CRiFF and CRiSPRi. Overall, none of the three methods performed best on the three references. CRiFF and CRISPRi reference sets are likely more reliable, but CRiFF is not genome-wide and CRiFF and CRISPRi are mostly available on the K562 cancer cell line. The BENGI reference set is genome-wide but likely contains many false positives. This study therefore calls for new reliable and genome-wide E/G reference data rather than new functional link E/G identification methods.