RESUMO
Muscle development is an important priority of pig breeding programs. There is a considerable variation in muscularity between the breeds, but the regulation mechanisms of genes underlying myogenesis are still unclear. Transcriptome data from two breeds of pigs with divergent muscularity (Mali and Hampshire) were integrated with histology, immunofluorescence and meat yield to identify differences in myogenesis during the early growth phase. The muscle transcriptomics analysis revealed 17,721 common, 1413 and 1115 unique transcripts to Hampshire and Mali, respectively. This study identified 908 differentially expressed genes (p < 0.05; log2FC > ±1) in the muscle samples, of which 550 were upregulated and 358 were downregulated in Hampshire pigs, indicating differences in physiological process related to muscle function and development. Expression of genes related to myoblast fusion (MYMK), skeletal muscle satellite cell proliferation (ANGPT1, CDON) and growth factors (HGF, IGF1, IGF2) were higher in Hampshire than Mali, even though transcript levels of several other myogenesis-related genes (MYF6, MYOG, MSTN) were similar. The number of fibers per fascicle and the expression of myogenic marker proteins (MYOD1, MYOG and PAX7) were more in Hampshire as compared to Mali breed of pig, supporting results of transcriptome studies. The results suggest that differences in muscularity between breeds could be related to the regulation of myoblast fusion and myogenic activities. The present study will help to identify genes that could be explored for their utility in the selection of animals with different muscularities.
Assuntos
Sus scrofa , Transcriptoma , Suínos/genética , Animais , Transcriptoma/genética , Sus scrofa/genética , Músculo Esquelético/metabolismo , Mali , Regulação da Expressão Gênica no Desenvolvimento , Desenvolvimento Muscular/genéticaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Anatomy teaching has traditionally been based on dissection. However, reduced hours in total and laboratory hours in gross anatomy along with a dearth of cadavers have ensued the search for a less time-consuming tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted in the Department of Anatomy in Sheikh Bhikhari Medical College, Hazaribag. A total of 282 medical students were taught gross anatomy, using three different learning modalities: dissection (n = 95), plastic models (n = 94), and three-dimensional (3D) anatomy software (n = 93). The knowledge of the students was examined by 100 multiple-choice question (MCQ) and tag questions followed by an evaluation questionnaire. RESULTS: When performance is considered, the dissection and 3D group performed better than the plastic models group in total, MCQs, and tag questions. In the evaluation questionnaire, dissection performed better than the other two modalities. Moreover, dissection and 3D software emerged as superior to the plastic models group. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA and t-test. Group-based analysis by ANOVA and gender-based analysis were done by Student's t-test. A comparison of students' perceptions was done by Kruskal-Wallis H-test. CONCLUSION: Dissection remains a favorite with students and accomplishes a significantly higher attainment of knowledge. Plastic models are less effective but are a valuable tool in preparation for cadaveric laboratories.
Résumé Introduction:L'enseignement de l'anatomie est traditionnellement basé sur la dissection. Cependant, la réduction des heures totales et des heures de laboratoire en anatomie globale ainsi que la pénurie de cadavres ont entraîné la recherche d'un outil moins chronophage.Méthodologie:L'étude a été menée dans le département d'anatomie du Sheikh Bhikhari Medical College, Hazaribag. Au total, 282 étudiants en médecine ont appris l'anatomie globale, en utilisant trois modalités d'apprentissage différentes : dissection (n = 95), modèles plastiques (n = 94) et logiciel d'anatomie 3D (n = 93). Les connaissances des étudiants ont été examinées par 100 questions QCM et tags suivies d'un questionnaire d'évaluation.Résultats:Lorsque les performances sont prises en compte, le groupe dissection et 3D a obtenu de meilleurs résultats que le groupe modèles plastiques au total, questions à choix multiples et questions d'étiquettes. Dans le questionnaire d'évaluation, la dissection a donné de meilleurs résultats que les deux autres modalités. De plus, les logiciels de dissection et de 3D se sont révélés supérieurs au groupe des modèles plastiques.Analyse Statistique:Toutes les données ont été analysées à l'aide du test ANOVA et T unidirectionnel. L'analyse basée sur le groupe par Anova et l'analyse comparative entre les sexes ont été réalisées à l'aide du test t des étudiants. Une comparaison des perceptions des étudiants a été réalisée par le test Krushal Wallis H.Conclusion:La dissection reste l'une des préférées des étudiants et permet d'atteindre un niveau de connaissances nettement plus élevé. Les modèles en plastique sont moins efficaces mais constituent un outil précieux pour la préparation des laboratoires cadavériques.