Search

Animal genomes are pervasively transcribed into multiple RNA molecules, of which many will not be translated into proteins. One major component of this transcribed non-coding genome is the long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), which are defined as transcripts longer than 200 nucleotides with low coding-potential capabilities. Domestic animals constitute a unique resource for studying the genetic and epigenetic basis of phenotypic variations involving protein-coding and non-coding RNAs, such as lncRNAs. This review presents the current knowledge regarding transcriptome-based catalogues of lncRNAs in major domesticated animals (pets and livestock species), covering a broad phylogenetic scale (from dogs to chicken), and in comparison with human and mouse lncRNA catalogues. Furthermore, we describe different methods to extract known or discover novel lncRNAs and explore comparative genomics approaches to strengthen the annotation of lncRNAs. We then detail different strategies contributing to a better understanding of lncRNA functions, from genetic studies such as GWAS to molecular biology experiments and give some case examples in domestic animals. Finally, we discuss the limitations of current lncRNA annotations and suggest research directions to improve them and their functional characterisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In addition to their common usages to study gene expression, RNA-seq data accumulated over the last 10 years are a yet-unexploited resource of SNPs in numerous individuals from different populations. SNP detection by RNA-seq is particularly interesting for livestock species since whole genome sequencing is expensive and exome sequencing tools are unavailable. These SNPs detected in expressed regions can be used to characterize variants affecting protein functions, and to study cis -regulated genes by analyzing allele-specific expression (ASE) in the tissue of interest. However, gene expression can be highly variable, and filters for SNP detection using the popular GATK toolkit are not yet standardized, making SNP detection and genotype calling by RNA-seq a challenging endeavor. We compared SNP calling results using GATK suggested filters, on two chicken populations for which both RNA-seq and DNA-seq data were available for the same samples of the same tissue. We showed, in expressed regions, a RNA-seq precision of 91% (SNPs detected by RNA-seq and shared by DNA-seq) and we characterized the remaining 9% of SNPs. We then studied the genotype (GT) obtained by RNA-seq and the impact of two factors (GT call-rate and read number per GT) on the concordance of GT with DNA-seq; we proposed thresholds for them leading to a 95% concordance. Applying these thresholds to 767 multi-tissue RNA-seq of 382 birds of 11 chicken populations, we found 9.5 M SNPs in total, of which ∼550,000 SNPs per tissue and population with a reliable GT (call rate ≥ 50%) and among them, ∼340,000 with a MAF ≥ 10%. We showed that such RNA-seq data from one tissue can be used to (i) detect SNPs with a strong predicted impact on proteins, despite their scarcity in each population (16,307 SIFT deleterious missenses and 590 stop-gained), (ii) study, on a large scale, cis -regulations of gene expression, with ∼81% of protein-coding and 68% of long non-coding genes (TPM ≥ 1) that can be analyzed for ASE, and with ∼29% of them that were cis -regulated, and (iii) analyze population genetic using such SNPs located in expressed regions. This work shows that RNA-seq data can be used with good confidence to detect SNPs and associated GT within various populations and used them for different analyses as GTEx studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]