Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-rn2sj Total loading time: 0.28 Render date: 2022-08-20T02:58:56.335Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Differences of cytosine methylation in parental lines and F1 hybrids of Large White×Meishan crosses and their effects on F1 performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2007

Jiang Cao-De
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Grazers and Herbivores of Chongqing, Southwest Agricultural University, Chongqing 400716, China
Deng Chang-Yan*
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Pig Genetics and Breeding, Ministry of Agriculture, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
Xiong Yuan-Zhu
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Pig Genetics and Breeding, Ministry of Agriculture, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
*
*Corresponding author: Email: dengchy@mail.hzau.edu.cn

Abstract

In order to probe the effect of methylation on heterosis, the methylation-sensitive arbitrarily primed polymerase chain reaction (AP-PCR) technique was adopted to amplify pig genome DNA with 40 single arbitrary primers. The material involved parental lines and F1 hybrids of Large White×Meishan crosses. Nineteen differentially methylated sites with RsaI+HpaII digestion and 14 differentially methylated sites with RsaI+MspII digestion between parental lines and the hybrid were found. All fragments detected in this study were grouped into four classes: (1) the same level of methylation in both parental lines and the hybrid; (2) the same level of methylation in one parent and the hybrid; (3) an increased level of methylation in the hybrid compared to the parents, and (4) a decreased level of methylation in the hybrid. Five sites had significant effects on seven traits (P<0.05). Sequence analysis showed that three sequences had a high-identity match in GenBank (greater than 87%) and two sequences had no match in the database. The percentage of G+C in three sequences was over 50, and the observed/expected CpG of all sequences was above 0.6. Furthermore, one sequence contained G/C boxes. This study demonstrated that the sites in CpG islands within a gene promoter were differentially methylated in the hybrid compared to parental lines; methylated sites contributed differentially to F1 performance, showing that heterosis could benefit from either expression or repression of some genes.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © China Agricultural University and Cambridge University Press 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arthur, PF, Renand, G and Krauss, D (2001) Genetic and phenotypic relationships among different measures of growth and feed efficiency in young Charolais bulls. Livestock Production Science 58: 131139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, AP (1986) CpG-rich islands and the function of DNA methylation. Nature 321: 209212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheng, NH, Yang, JS, Gao, YP et al. , (1996) Differential display of mRNA between hybrid F 1 and its parental inbred inbreed lines. Chinese Science Bolletin 41: 451454.Google Scholar
Cheng, NH, Yang, JS, Gao, YP et al. , (1997) Alteration of gene expression in rice hybrid F 1 and its parental seedlings. Acta Biotanica Sinica 39(4)379382 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Doelfler, W (1983) DNA methylation and gene activity. Annual Review of Biochemistry 52: 93124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnegan, EJ, Brettell, RIS and Dennis, ES (1993) The role of DNA methylation in the regulation of plant gene expression. In: Jost, JP and Saluz, HP (editors) DNA Methylation: Molecular Biology and Biological Significance. Basel: Birkhauser, pp. 218261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzhugh, JHA and Taylor, SCS (1971) Genetic analysis of degree of maturity. Journal of Animal Science 33(4): 17725.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardiner-Garden, M and Frommer, M (1987) CpG islands in vertebrate genomes. Journal of Molecular Biology 196: 261282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gonzalgo, ML, Liang, G, Spruck III, CH (1997) Identification and characterization of differentially methylated regions of genomic DNA by methylation-sensitive arbitratily primed PCR. Cancer Research 57(4): 594599.Google Scholar
Gruenbaum, Y, Naveh-Many, Y, Cedar, H et al. , (1981) Sequence specificity of methylation in higher plant DNA. Nature 292: 860862.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, XP, Xiong, YZ, Liu, GQ et al. , (2003) Effects of individual gene heterosity on growth traits in swine. Acta Genetica Sinica 30(5): 431436 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Liang, GN, Carol, E, Salem, MC et al. , (1998) DNA methylation differences associated with tumor tissues identified by genome scanning analysis. Genomics 53(3): 260268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liang, GN, Mard, L and Gonzalgo, CS (2002) Identification of DNA methylation differences during tumorigenesis by methylation-sensitive arbitrarily primed polymerase chain reaction. Methods 27: 150155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McClelland, M, Nelson, M and Raschke, E (1994) Effect of site-specific modification on restriction endonucleases and DNA modification methyltransferases. Nucleic Acids Research 22(17): 36403659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Okano, M, Bell, DW, Haber, D et al. , (1999) DNA methyltranferase Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b are essential for de novo methylation and mammalian development. Cell 99: 247257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reik, W and Suranic, A (1997) Genomic Imprinting. Oxford, UK: IRL Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Sambrook, J and Russell, DW (1989) Molecular Cloning: a Laboratory Manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.Google Scholar
Xiong, YZ (1999) Introduction to Breeding Pig Measurement. Bejing: China Agricultural Press(in Chinese).Google Scholar
Xiong, LZ, Yang, GP, Xu, CG et al. , (1998) Relationships of differential gene expression in leaves with heterosis and heterozygosity in a rice diallel cross. Molecular Breeding 4: 129136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Q, Zhou, ZQ, Yang, GP et al. , (1996) Molecular marker heterozygosity and hybrid performance in indica and Japonica rice. Theory and Application Genetics 93: 12181224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Differences of cytosine methylation in parental lines and F1 hybrids of Large White×Meishan crosses and their effects on F1 performance
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Differences of cytosine methylation in parental lines and F1 hybrids of Large White×Meishan crosses and their effects on F1 performance
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Differences of cytosine methylation in parental lines and F1 hybrids of Large White×Meishan crosses and their effects on F1 performance
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *