Molecular genetics as a diagnostic tool in farm animals

A Novel Circular RNA circITSN2 Targets the miR-218-5p/LMO7 Axis to Promote Chicken Embryonic Myoblast Proliferation and Differentiation

Circular RNA (circRNA) is a class of endogenous non-coding RNAs without 5′ and 3′ ends; an increasing number of studies show that circRNA is involved in skeletal muscle development. From our previous sequencing data, the circRNAome in breast muscle of two chicken lines with a distinct rate of muscle development, which included a fast muscle growing broiler (FMGB) and a slow muscle growing layer (SMGL), we found a novel differentially expressed circRNA generated by intersectin 2 (ITSN2) gene (named circITSN2). We verified that circITSN2 is a skeletal muscle-enriched circRNA that promotes chicken primary myoblast (CPM) proliferation and differentiation. Further molecular mechanism analysis of circITSN2 in chicken myogenesis was performed, and we found circITSN2 directly targeting miR-218-5p. Besides, miR-218-5p inhibits CPM proliferation and differentiation, which is contrary to circITSN2. Commonly, circRNAs act as a miRNA sponge to alleviate the inhibition of miRNAs on mRNAs. Thus, we also identified that a downstream gene LIM domain 7 (LMO7) was inhibited by miR-218-5p, while circITSN2 could block the inhibitory effect of miR-218-5p by targeting it. Functional analysis revealed that LMO7 also accelerates CPM proliferation and differentiation, which was similar to circITSN2 but contrary to miR-218-5p. Taken together, these results suggested that circITSN2 promotes chicken embryonic skeletal muscle development via relieving the inhibition of miR-218-5p on LMO7. Our findings revealed a novel circITSN2/miR-218-5p/LMO7 axis in chicken embryonic skeletal muscle development, which expands our understanding of the complex muscle development regulatory network.

Microsatellite detection of donor-derived sperm DNA following germ cell transplantation in cattle

Although autologous and heterologous transplantation has resulted in colonisation of recipient testes in cattle, the ability of the transplanted spermatogonial stem cells to complete spermatogenesis has not yet been determined. The objective of the present study was to identify and validate microsatellite markers that can distinguish the genotype of different individuals and therefore can be used to detect the presence of donor DNA in recipient semen samples. In a previous study by this group, successful colonisation of recipient testes by heterologous transfer using a fluorescent dye was shown. In the present work, some of the same recipient animals were investigated further to monitor donor-derived sperm production. The bovine microsatellite detection method was developed specifically to test the ejaculates of the recipients and can also be used to pre-match individuals before germ cell transplantation. Semen was collected from the recipients 52–98 weeks after transfer and the presence of donor DNA in the samples was determined using microsatellite markers. In one of the recipients, all collected semen samples were shown to be positive for donor-derived cells; however, the percentage of donor spermatozoa in the recipient ejaculate declined with time. The donor DNA was also detected in both single cell suspensions and testis tissue from this recipient. These results demonstrate for the first time that testicular germ cell transplantation between different breeds of cattle is feasible and the recipients thereof are able to produce spermatozoa of donor origin. This technology has potential applications in livestock breeding systems and may provide an alternative to artificial insemination.

Practical application of DNA fingerprinting to trace beef

DNA fingerprinting allows the verification of conventional methods used to implement beef traceability. At any point along the supply chain, the identity of an animal or piece of meat can be checked by comparison of its DNA profile with an initial sample. Practical application of DNA fingerprinting to trace beef requires a choice of DNA markers as well as the optimization of sampling methods. This has been achieved as the result of collaboration between meat technicians and geneticists over a period of 4 years. The discrimination power of nine highly polymorphic microsatellite markers was evaluated. We propose that three markers (with a 0.001 probability that two individual profiles match by chance) are adequate for routine tests. Two key points along the production-commercialization chain where sampling must be systematic were defined: (i) the tagging of the calf (identity control) and (ii) after slaughter (slaughter control), before the animal loses its external appearance. The identity control was blood collected on a filter paper adapted to the ear tag; the slaughter control was the tagged ear itself. These constituted the control samples, which were archived with a code matching the individual tag number. Test samples were obtained on a random basis from live animals, carcasses, and pieces of meat at cutting halls and at the retail outlet and in cases when the verification of identity was needed. The DNA profiles of the test samples and the controls were then obtained and compared, to verify either an individual identity or the origin of a piece of meat from the stated animal.