| Title |
Mapping the dominant wound healing and soft tissue regeneration QTL in MRL × CAST
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Mammalian Genome, December 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00335-005-0077-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hongrun Yu, Subburaman Mohan, Godfred L. Masinde, David J. Baylink |
| Abstract |
We have used a mouse ear punch model and the QTL (quantitative trait loci) mapping technique to identify genes that are responsible for soft tissue regeneration. In the early studies, we have identified several QTL and have shown that the inheritance of ear healing was additive in one cross (MRL x SJL), and recessive in another cross (DBA x 129). Because CAST mice are genetically distinct and have a different genetic background, CAST would facilitate the identification of common and novel QTL when crossed with common inbred lines. We made a cross between super healer MRL and poor healer CAST and collected ear punch phenotype and marker genotype data from F(2). Ear punch healing exhibited a dominant mode of inheritance in this cross. There were three main QTL on Chromosomes 4, 9, and 17, and two suggestive QTL on Chromosomes 1 (new) and 7. Taken together, these QTL accounted for about 29% of total F2 variance of MRL x CAST. Compared with another study using the same cross, we found a totally different set of QTL. Two QTL interactions were identified by a full QTL model: Chromosomes 4 x 17 and 9 x 17; the latter reached to a statistical level at p < 0.05. These interactions explained about 4% of the F2 phenotypic variance. We conclude that soft tissue regeneration is controlled by multiple genes and locus vs. locus interactions. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 21% |
| Unknown | 11 | 79% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 21% |
| Researcher | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 64% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 7% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,452,489
of 22,783,848 outputs
Outputs from Mammalian Genome
#318
of 1,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,384
of 148,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mammalian Genome
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,783,848 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,126 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 148,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.