| Title |
Asymmetries, heterosis, and phenotypic profiles of red junglefowl, White Plymouth Rocks, and F1 and F2 reciprocal crosses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Applied Genetics, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13353-018-0435-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
D. A. T. Sutherland, C. F. Honaker, B. Dorshorst, L. Andersson, P. B. Siegel |
| Abstract |
During the domestication of farm animals, humans have manipulated genetic variation for growth and reproduction through artificial selection. Here, data are presented for growth, reproductive, and behavior traits for the red junglefowl, a line of White Plymouth Rock chickens, and their F1and F2reciprocal crosses. Intra- and intergenerational comparisons for growth related traits reflected considerable additive genetic variation. In contrast, those traits associated with reproduction exhibited heterosis. The role of sexual selection was seen in the evolution of prominent secondary sexual ornaments that lend to female choice and male-male competition. The large differences between parental lines in fearfulness to humans were only mitigated slightly in the intercross generations. Whereas, overall F1generation heterosis was not transferred to the F2, there was developmental stability in the F2, as measured by relative asymmetry of bilateral traits. Through multigenerational analyses between the red junglefowl and the domestic White Plymouth Rocks, we observed plasticity and considerable residual genetic variation. These factors likely facilitated the adaptability of the chicken to a broad range of husbandry practices throughout the world. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 46% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 March 2018.
All research outputs
#20,724,339
of 23,323,574 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Genetics
#326
of 401 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#294,064
of 332,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Genetics
#11
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,323,574 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 401 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 332,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.