Ruminal transcriptomic analysis of grass-fed and grain-fed angus beef cattle
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 10, Issue: 6, Page: e0116437
2015
- 18Citations
- 41Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations18
- Citation Indexes18
- 18
- CrossRef15
- Captures41
- Readers41
- 41
Article Description
Beef represents a major diet component and one of the major sources of protein in human. The beef industry in the United States is currently undergoing changes and is facing increased demands especially for natural grass-fed beef. The grass-fed beef obtained their nutrients directly from pastures, which contained limited assimilable energy but abundant amount of fiber. On the contrary, the grain-fed steers received a grain-based regime that served as an efficient source of high-digestible energy. Lately, ruminant animals have been accused to be a substantial contributor for the green house effect. Therefore, the concerns from environmentalism, animal welfare and public health have driven consumers to choose grass-fed beef. Rumen is one of the key workshops to digest forage constituting a critical step to supply enough nutrients for animals' growth and production. We hypothesize that rumen may function differently in grass- and grain-fed regimes. The objective of this study was to find the differentially expressed genes in the ruminal wall of grass-fed and grain-fed steers, and then explore the potential biopathways. In this study, the RNA Sequencing (RNA-Seq) method was used to measure the gene expression level in the ruminal wall. The total number of reads per sample ranged from 24,697,373 to 36,714,704. The analysis detected 342 differentially expressed genes between ruminal wall samples of animals raised under different regimens. The Fisher's exact test performed in the Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) software found 16 significant molecular networks. Additionally, 13 significantly enriched pathways were identified, most of which were related to cell development and biosynthesis. Our analysis demonstrated that most of the pathways enriched with the differentially expressed genes were related to cell development and biosynthesis. Our results provided valuable insights into the molecular mechanisms resulting in the phenotype difference between grass-fed and grain-fed cattle.
Bibliographic Details
10.1371/journal.pone.0116437; 10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t004
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84939231380&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26090810; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t002; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0116437; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437&type=printable; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t003; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t002; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.t004; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g001; http://www.plosone.org/article/metrics/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116437&type=printable; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116437.g002
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know