Cited by 34Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestockGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsResearch in Cotton Cultivation

Variation in the Ovine KAP6-3 Gene (KRTAP6-3) Is Associated with Variation in Mean Fibre Diameter-Associated Wool Traits

Open access
Li, Shaobin, Zhou, Huitong, Gong, Hua, Zhao, Fangfang, Wang, Jiqing, Luo, Yuzhu, Hickford, Jon·2017·Genes

Abstract

Polymerase chain reaction-single stranded conformational polymorphism (PCR-SSCP) analysis was used to investigate variation in the ovine KAP6-3 gene (KRTAP6-3) in 383 Merino × Southdown-cross lambs from four sire-lines, and to determine whether this variation affects wool traits. Five PCR-SSCP banding patterns, representing five different nucleotide sequences, were detected, including four previously identified (named A, B, C, and F) variants and one newly identified (named G) variant. A new non-synonymous single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) and a 45-bp deletion were detected in variant G. Of the three common genotypes (AA, AB, and AG) identified in these sheep, wool from sheep that were AG, on average, had a lower mean fibre diameter (MFD), fibre diameter standard deviation (FDSD), and prickle factor (PF) than wool from AA sheep, whereas wool from AB sheep, on average, had a higher MFD, FDSD, and PF than wool from AA sheep. This suggests that variation in ovine KRTAP6-3 affect MFD, FDSD, and PF, and that this gene may have potential for use as a gene-maker for improving fibre diameter-associated wool traits.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/genes8080204

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 27 · Cited by 34

Authors
Li, S., Zhou, H., Gong, H., Zhao, F., Wang, J., Luo, Y., & Hickford, J.
Affiliations
Gansu Agricultural University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Luo, Yuzhu
  • Hickford, Jon
Venue
Genes
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2017-08-18
Volume
8
Issue
8
Pages
204
ISSN
2073-4425 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2748820551
Cited by
34
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genes (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Lincoln University Research Archive (Lincoln University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Agricultural and Marketing Research and Development Trust
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • China Scholarship Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Research in Cotton Cultivation
Keywords
single nucleotide polymorphisms, genotype-phenotype correlation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review