Advertisement

Molecular Biology Reports

, Volume 45, Issue 5, pp 1445–1456 | Cite as

The application of gene marker-assisted selection and proteomics for the best meat quality criteria and body measurements in Qinchuan cattle breed

  • Mohamed E. Abd El-Hack
  • Sameh A. Abdelnour
  • Ayman A. Swelum
  • Muhammad Arif
Review
  • 120 Downloads

Abstract

In the past few decades, enhancement of animal productivity has been gaining increasing attention among decisions-makers, politicians, mangers, and breeders, because of the increasing of world population and shortage of natural resources. The selection of high productivity animals is the main goal, through the application of genetic improvement programs. The use of molecular genetics has conferred significant breeding advantages over conventional breeding techniques. In this regard, many economic characteristics are controlled by a small number of multiple gene loci, each of which is responsible for trait diversity and hence they are referred to as quantitative trait loci (QTL). Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which have recently been discovered through DNA sequencing, are considered one of the most useful types of genetic marker. SNPs are found where different nucleotides occur at the same position in the DNA sequence. They are found in both coding and noncoding regions of the genome and are present at one SNP in every 1000 b. Strategies for the identification and application of markers are based on reference to examples of loci that can control various traits. Furthermore, markers for growth, body measurements, and meat quality traits are preferred, because they can be used to predict the performance of animals, via blood samples, in the first few days of animal life. Marker-assisted selection using SNPs, such asSIRT1, SIRT2, LPL, CRTC2, SIX4, UCPs, and ZBTB38as selection criteria of body measurements and meat traits in beef cattle, will be beneficial in selection and breeding programs. The proteomic is a novel marker and a new approache of biotechnology which increases the understanding of the biological processes, besides being a remarkable biomarker that interrelated to growth and meat quality traits. Proteomics is a vigorous tool as usage for deduces molecular processes between quality traits and muscle proteins, which are helpful in analyzing the mechanisms of biochemistry that influence quality. So they could be potential biomarker for some meat quality traits. Among them, Actin, Myosin, Heat shock proteins are used a novel approaches in the field of biotechnology to understand the proteomics changes. This review article highlights the novel findings on the potential use of MAS and proteomics as biomarker for the selection for meat quality and carcass traits in Qinchuan cattle breed.

Keywords

Cattle Meat quality Gene marker-assisted Proteomics Selection 

Abbreviations

MAS

Marker-assisted selection

BL

Body length

HW

Hip width

WH

Withers height

HH

Hip height

RL

Rump length

UBT

Ultrasound backfat thickness

CC

Chest circumference

ULMA

Ultrasound loin muscle area

PBW

Pin bone width

CD

Chest depth

HDACs

Histone deacetylases

CtBPs

C-terminal binding proteins

SNP

Single-nucleotide polymorphism

QTL

Quantitative trait locus.

Notes

Acknowledgements

All authors thank their universities for their help in accomplishing this work.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed equally in writing this review article.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Authors confirm that none of them have any competing interests in the manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Pedersen LD, Sorensen AC, Berg P (2009) Marker-assisted selection can reduce true as well as pedigree-estimated inbreeding. J Dairy Sci 92(5):2214–2223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Xu HC, Gui LS, Song N, Zhang YY, Wang HC, Zan LS (2015) Association of CRTC2 gene polymorphisms with growth and meat quality traits of Qinchuan cattle. Genet Mol Res 14(4):12912–12920CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dekkers JC (2004) Commercial application of marker- and gene-assisted selection in livestock: strategies and lessons. J Anim Sci 13:313–328Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alim MA, Fan Y, Wu XP, Xie Y, Zhang Y, Zhang SL, Sun DX, Zhang Q, Liu L, Guo G (2012) Genetic effects of stearoyl-coenzyme A desaturase (SCD) polymorphism on milk production traits in the Chinese dairy population. Mol Biol Rep 39(9):8733–8740CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Camargo GM, Cardoso DF, Gil FM, Fonseca PD et al (2012) First polymorphisms in JY-1 gene in cattle (Bos taurus indicus) and their association with sexual precocity and growth traits. Mol Biol Rep 39(12):10105–10109CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gui L, Wang H, Wei S, Zhang Y, Zan L (2014) Molecular characterization, expression profiles, and analysis of Qinchuan cattle SIRT1 gene association with meat quality and body measurement traits (Bos taurus). Mol Biol Rep 41:5237–5246CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gui LS, Yang WC, Zhao CP, Wei SJ, Zhao ZD, Zan LS (2014) Association of SIRT2 gene polymorphisms with body measurement and growth traits of Qinchuan cattle. Gen Mol Res 13(4):8834–8844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ashikari M, Lin S, Yamamoto T, Takashi A, Nishimura ER, Angeles Q, Qian H, Matsuoka M (2007) Isolation of a QTL controlling grain number and QTL pyramiding to combine loci for grain number and plant height in rice. Rice Genet 5:169–175Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Singh U, Deb R, Alyethodi RR, Alex R, Kumar S, Chakraborty S (2014) Molecular markers and their applications in cattle genetic research: A review. Biomark Genom Med 6:49–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Olesen I, Gjerde B, Groen AF (1999) Accommodation and evaluation of ethical, strategic and economic values in animal breeding goals. Book of Abstracts No. 5. EAAP; p 33Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Barillet F (2007) Genetic improvement for dairy production in sheep and goats. Small Rum Res 70:60–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chauhan T, Rajiv K (2010) Molecular markers and their applications in fisheries and aquaculture. Adv Biosci Biotechnol 1:281–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Deb R, Chakraborty S (2012) Trends in veterinary diagnostics. J Vet Sci Technol 3:103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Imai SI, Armstrong CM, Kaeberlein M, Guarente L (2000) Transcriptional silencing and longevity protein Sir2 is an NAD dependent histone deacetylase. Nature 403:795–800CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liang F, Kume S, Koya D (2009) SIRT1 and insulin resistance. Nat Rev Endocrinol 5:367–373CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Edwards JR, Perrien DS, Fleming N, Nyman JS, Ono K, Connelly L et al (2013) Silent information regulator (Sir)T1 inhibits NF-kB signaling to maintain normal skeletal remodeling. J Bone Min Res 28(4):960–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haigis MC, Sinclair DA (2010) Mammalian sirtuins: biological insights and disease relevance. Annu Rev Pathol 5:253–295CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Qiao L, Shao J (2006) SIRT1 regulates adiponectin gene expression through Foxo1-C/Enhancer-binding protein c transcriptional complex. J Biol Chem 281:39915–39924CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Picard F, Kurtev M, Chung N, Topark-Ngarm A, Senawong T, Machado de Oliveira R et al (2004) SIRT1 promotes fat mobilization in white adipocytes by repressing PPAR-gamma. Nature 429:771–776CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Backesjo CM, Li Y, Lindgren U, Haldosen LA (2009) Activation of SIRT1 decreases adipocyte formation during osteoblast differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. Cells Tiss Org 189:93–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cohen K, Artsi H, Levin A, Abramowitz E et al (2011) SIRT1 Is a regulator of bone mass and a repressor of sost encoding for sclerostin, a bone formation inhibitor. Endocrinology 152(12):4514–4524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu Y, Zan L, Zhao S, Xin Y, Li L, Cui W et al (2010) Molecular characterization, polymorphism of bovine ZBTB38 gene and association with body measurement traits in native Chinese cattle breeds. Mol Biol Rep 37:4041–4049CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li MX, Sun XM, Zhang LZ, Wang J, Huang YZ, Sun YJ, Chen H (2013) A novel c.-274C> G polymorphism in bovine SIRT1 gene contributes to diminished promoter activity and is associated with increased body size. Anim Genet 44(5):584–587CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tian WQ, Wang HC, Song FB, Zan LS, Wang H, Wang HB et al (2011) Association between a single nucleotide polymorphism in the bovine chemerin gene and carcass traits in Qinchuan cattle. Genet Mol Res 10:2833–2840CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guarente L (2007) Sirtuins in aging and disease. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 72:483–488CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li W, Zhang B, Tang J, Cao Q, Wu Y, Wu C et al (2007) Sirtuin 2, a mammalian homolog of yeast silent information regulator-2 longevity regulator, is an oligodendroglial protein that decelerates cell differentiation through deacetylating alpha-tubulin. J Neurosci 27(10):2606–2616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhou Y, Zhang H, He B, Du J, Lin H, Cerione RA et al (2012) The bicyclic intermediate structure provides insights into the desuccinylation mechanism of human sirtuin 5 (SIRT5). J Biol Chem 287:28307–28314CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kim HS, Vassilopoulos A, Wang RH, Lahusen T, Xiao Z, Xu X et al (2011) SIRT2 maintains genome integrity and suppresses tumorigenesis through regulating APC/C activity. Cancer Cell 20:487–499CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Marmorstein R (2004) Structure and chemistry of the Sir2 family of NAD+-dependent histone/protein deactylases. Biochem Soc Trans 32:904–909CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Blander G, Guarente L (2004) The Sir2 family of protein deacetylases. Annu Rev Biochem 73:417–435CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Peck B, Chen CY, Ho KK, Di Fruscia P et al (2010) SIRT inhibitors induce cell death and p53 acetylation through targeting both SIRT1 and SIRT2. Mol Cancer Ther 9:844–855CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang F, Tong Q (2009) SIRT2 suppresses adipocyte differentiation by deacetylating FOXO1 and enhancing FOXO1’s repressive interaction with PPARγ. Mol Biol Cell 20:801–808CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jing E, Gesta S, Kahn CR (2007) SIRT2 regulates adipocyte differentiation through FoxO1 acetylation/deacetylation. Cell Metab 6:105–114CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Poirier P, Giles TD, Bray GA, Hong Y, Stern JS, Pi-Sunyer FX, Eckel RH (2006) Obesity and cardiovascular disease: pathophysiology, evaluation, and effect of weight loss. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 26:968–976CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dryden SC, Nahhas FA, Nowak JE, Goustin AS et al (2003) Role for human SIRT2 NAD-dependent deacetylase activity in control of mitotic exit in the cell cycle. Mol Cell Biol 23:3173–3185CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nahhas F, Dryden SC, Abrams J, Tainsky MA (2007) Mutations in SIRT2 deacetylase which regulate enzymatic activity but not its interaction with HDAC6 and tubulin. Mol Cell Biochem 303:221–230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    North BJ, Verdin E (2017) Mitotic regulation of SIRT2 by cyclin-dependent kinase 1-dependent phosphorylation. J Biol Chem 282:19546–19555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Li Y, He PP, Zhang DW, Zheng XL, Cayabyab FS, Yin WD et al (2014) Lipoprotein lipase: from gene to atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis 237:597–608CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gui L, Jia C, Zhang Y, Zhao C, Zan L (2016) Association studies on the bovine lipoprotein lipase gene polymorphism with growth and carcass quality traits in Qinchuan cattle. Mol Cell Prob 30:61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Goldberg IJ, Soprano DR, Wyatt ML, Vanni TM, Kirchgessner TG et al (1989) Localization of lipoprotein lipase mRNA in selected rat tissues. J Lipid Res 30:e1569-e1577Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pethick DW, Dunshea FR (1993) Fat metabolism and turnover. In: Forbes JM, France J (eds) Quantitative Aspects of Ruminant Digestion and Metabolism. CAB International Press, Wallingford, pp 291–311Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Murthy V, Julien P, Gagne C (1996) Molecular pathobiology of the human lipoprotein lipase gene. Pharmacol Ther 70:e101-e135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gerbens F, de Koning DJ, Harders FL, Meuwissen TH, Janss LL et al (2000) The effect of adipocyte and heart fatty acid-binding protein genes on intramuscular fat and backfat content in Meishan crossbred pigs. J Anim Sci 78:e552-e559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Xu PX (2013) The EYA–SO/SIX complex in development and disease. Pediatr Nephrol 28(6):843–854CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wang XP, Luoreng ZM, Li F, Wang JR, Li N, Li SH (2012) Genetic polymorphisms of lipoprotein lipase gene and their associations with growth traits in Xiangxi cattle. Mol Biol Rep 39:10331–10338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Oh D, La B, Lee Y, Byun Y, Lee J et al (2013) Identification of novel single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the lipoprotein lipase (LPL) gene associated with fatty acid composition in Korean cattle. Mol Biol Rep 40:3155–3163CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ding XZ, Liang CN, Guo X, Xing CF, Bao PJ, Chu M et al (2012) A novel single nucleotide polymorphism in exon 7 of LPL gene and its association with carcass traits and visceral fat deposition in yak (Bos grunniens) steers. Mol Biol Rep 39:e669-e673Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Weisman R, Cohen A, Gasser SM (2014) TORC2-a new player in genome stability. EMBO Mol Med 6:995–1002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Loewith R, Hall MN (2011) Target of rapamycin (TOR) in nutrient signaling and growth control. Genetics 189:1177–1201CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Natarajan R, Trivedi-Vyas D, Wairkar YP (2013) Tuberous sclerosis complex regulates Drosophila neuromuscular junction growth via the TORC2/Akt pathway. Hum Mol Genet 22:2010–2023CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Koo SH, Flechner L, Qi L, Zhang X, Screaton RA, Jeffries S (2005) The CREB coactivator TORC2 is a key regulator of fasting glucose metabolism. Nature 437:1109–1111CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wang Y, Vera L, Fischer WH, Montminy M (2009) The CREB coactivator CRTC2 links hepatic ER stress and fasting gluconeogenesis. Nature 460:534–537CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Erion DM, Kotas ME, McGlashon J, Yonemitsu S et al (2013) cAMP-responsive element-binding protein (CREB)-regulated transcription coactivator 2 (CRTC2) promotes glucagon clearance and hepatic amino acid catabolism to regulate glucose homeostasis. J Biol Chem 288:16167–16176CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Panjono KSM, Lee IS, Lee SK (2009) Carcass characteristics of Hanwoo (Korean cattle) from different sex conditions, raising altitudes and slaughter seasons. Livest Sci 123(2–3):283–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kawakami K, Sato S, Ozaki H, Ikeda K (2000) Six family genes—structure and function as transcription factors and their roles in development. Bioessays 22(7):616–626CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wang G, Zhang S, Wei S, Zhang Y, Li Y, Fu C et al (2014) Novel polymorphisms of SIX4 gene and their association with body measurement traits in Qinchuan cattle. Gene 539:107–110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Grifone R, Demignon J, Houbron C, Souil E, Niro C, Seller MJ et al (2004) Six1 and Six4 homeoproteins are required for Pax3 and Mrf expression during myogenesis in the mouse embryo. Development 132(9):2235–2249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Grifone R, Laclef C, Spitz F, Lopez S, Demignon J, Guidotti JE et al (2004) Six1 and Eya1 expression can reprogram adult muscle from the slow-twitch phenotype into the fast-twitch phenotype. Mol Cell Biol 24(14):6253–6267CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Niro C, Demignon J, Vincent S, Liu Y, Giordani J et al (2010) Six1 and Six4 gene expression is necessary to activate the fast-type muscle gene program in the mouse primary myotome. Dev Biol 338(2):168–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Himeda CL, Ranish JA, Angello JC, Maire P, Aebersold R, Hauschka SD (2004) Quantitative proteomic identification of SIX4 as the trexbinding factor in the muscle creatine kinase enhancer. Mol Cell Biol 24(5):2132–2143CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Stefan K, Chen YZ, Bradford BL (2005) The mitochondrial uncoupling-protein homologues. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 6:248–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Wang Y, Yang W, Gui L, Wang H, Zan L (2016) Association and expression analyses of the Ucp2 and Ucp3 gene polymorphisms with body measurement and meat quality traits in Qinchuan cattle. J Genet 95:939–946CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ricquier D, Bouillaud F (2000) The uncoupling protein homologues: UCP1, UCP2, UCP3, StUCP and AtUCP. Biochem J 345:161–179CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Donadelli M, Dando I, Fiorini C, Palmieri M (2014) UCP2, a mitochondrial protein regulated at multiple levels. Cell Mol Life Sci 71:1171–1190CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Azzu V, Brand MD (2010) The on–off switches of the mitochondrial uncoupling proteins. Trends Biochem Sci 35:298–307CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Brand MD, Esteves TC (2005) Physiological functions of the mitochondrial uncoupling proteins UCP2 and UCP3. Cell Metab 2:85–93CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Srivastava N, Prakash J, Lakhan R, Agarwal CG, Pant DC, Mittal B (2010) A common polymorphism in the promoter of UCP2 is associated with obesity and hyperinsulenemia in northern Indians. Mol Cell Biochem 337:293–298CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Andersen G, Dalgaard LT, Justesen JM, Anthonsen S, Nielsen T, Thorner LW et al (2013) The frequent UCP2-866G> A polymorphism protects against insulin resistance and is associated with obesity: a study of obesity and related metabolic traits among 17,636 Danes. Int J Obes 37:175–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Say YH, Ban ZL, Arumugam Y, Kaur T, Tan ML, Chia PP et al (2014) Uncoupling protein 2 gene (UCP2) 45-bp I/D polymorphism is associated with adiposity among Malaysian women. J Biosci 39:867–875CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Han X, Jiang T, Yang H, Zhang Q, Wang W, Fan B, Lui B (2012) Investigation of four porcine candidate genes (H-FABP, MYOD1, UCP3 and MASTR) for meat quality traits in large white pigs. Mol Biol Rep 39:6599–6605CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    De Almeida BL, De Souza BM, Assmann TS, Boucas AP, Bauer AC, Canani LH et al (2014) Association of the UCP polymorphisms with susceptibility to obesity: case–control study and meta-analysis. Mol Biol Rep 41:5053–5067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Tizioto PC, Coutinho LL, Decker JE, Schnabe RD, Rosa KO, Oliveira PS et al (2015) Global liver gene expression differences in Nelore steers with divergent residual feed intake phenotypes. BMC Genom 16:242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Musa CV, Mancini A, Alfieri A, Labruna G, Valerio G, Franzese A et al (2012) Four novel UCP3 gene variants associated with childhood obesity: effect on fatty acid oxidation and on prevention of triglyceride storage. Int J Obes 36:207–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Sasai N, Matsuda E, Sarashina E, Ishida Y, Kawaichi M (2005) Identification of a novel BTB-zinc finger transcriptional repressor, CIBZ, that interacts with CtBP corepressor. Genes Cells 10:871–885CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Filion GJ, Zhenilo S, Salozhin S, Yamada D, Prokhortchouk E, Defossez PA (2006) A family of human zinc finger proteins that bind methylated DNA and repress transcription. Mol Cell Biol 26:169–181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Cai Y, Li J, Yang S, Li P, Zhang X, Liu H (2012) CIBZ a novel BTB domain-containing protein, is involved in mouse. PLoS ONE 7(3):e33156CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Xue M, Zan LS, Gao L, Wang HB (2011) A novel polymorphism of the myogenin gene is associated with body measurement traits in native Chinese breeds. Genet Mol Res 10:2721–2728CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Kiefer H, Hermitte FC, Ravassard P, Bayard E, Brunet I, Mallet J (2005) ZENON, a novel POZ Kruppel-like DNA binding protein associated with differentiation and/or survival of late postmitotic neurons. Mol Cell Biol 25:1713–1729CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Oikawa Y, Matsuda E, Nishii T, Ishida Y, Kawaichi M (2008) Down-regulation of CIBZ, a novel substrate of caspase-3, induces apoptosis. J Biol Chem 283:14242–14247CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Zhou G, Dudgeon C, Li M, Cao Y, Zhang L, Jin H (2010) Molecular cloning of the HGD gene and association of SNPs with meat quality traits in Chinese red cattle. Mol Biol Rep 37:603–611CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Wu W, Gao X, Dai Y, Fu Y, Li X, Dai R (2015) Post-mortem changes in sarcoplasmic proteome and its relationship to meat color traits in M. semitendinosus of Chinese Luxi yellow cattle. Food Res Int 72:98–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Lametsch R, Karlsson A, Rosenvold K, Andersen HJ, Roepstorff P, Bendixen E (2003) Postmortem proteome changes of porcine muscle related to tenderness. J Agric Food Chem 51(24):6992–6997CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Tricarico D, Selvaggi M, Passantino G, De Palo P, Dario C, Centoducati P, Camerino GM (2016) ATP sensitive potassium channels in the skeletal muscle function: involvement of the KCNJ11 (Kir6. 2) gene in the determination of mechanical Warner Bratzer shear force. Front Physiol 7:167CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Tizioto PC, Gasparin G, Souza MM, Mudadu MA, Coutinho LL, Mourão GB et al (2013) Identification of KCNJ11 as a functional candidate gene for bovine meat tenderness. Physiol Genom 45:1215–1221.  https://doi.org/10.1152/physiolgenomics.00137.2012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Rosa AF, Cristina T, Poleti MMD, Fonseca LD, Balieiro JCC, Silva SLE, Eler JP (2017) Proteome changes of beef in Nellore cattle with different genotypes for tenderness. Meat Sci 138:1–9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Polati R, Menini M, Robotti E, Millioni R, Marengo E, Novelli E, Cecconi D (2012) Proteomic changes involved in tenderization of bovine Longissimus dorsi muscle during prolonged ageing. Food Chem 135(3):2052–2069CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Guillemin N, Jurie C, Cassar-Malek I, Hocquette J-F, Renand G, Picard B (2011) Variations in the abundance of 24 protein biomarkers of beef tenderness according to muscle and animal type. Animal 5(6):885 – 894CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Moloto KW, Frylinck L, Modika KY, Pitse T, Strydom PE, Koorsen G (2017) Is there a Possibility of Meat Tenderness Protein Biomarkers on the Horizon? Int J Agric Innov Res 6(3):467–472Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Rodrigues RTS, Chizzotti ML, Vital CE, Baracat-Pereira MC, Barros E, Busato KC, Martins TS (2017) Differences in beef quality between Angus (Bos Taurus) and Nellore (Bos taurus indicus) cattle through a proteomic and phosphoproteomic approach. PLoS ONE, 12(1), e0170294Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Guillemin NP, Jurie C, Renand G, Hocquette JF, Micol D, Lepetit J, Picard B (2012) Different phenotypic and proteomic markers explain variability of beef tenderness across muscles. Int J Biol 4(2):26–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Ramayo-Caldas Y, Renand G, Ballester M, Saintilan R, Rocha D (2016) Multibreed and multi-trait co-association analysis of meat tenderness and other meat quality traits in three French beef cattle breeds. Genet Sel Evol 48(1):37CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Li Z, Li X, Gao X, Shen QW, Du M, Zhang D (2017) Phosphorylation prevents in vitro myofibrillar proteins degradation by µ-calpain. Food Chem 218(1):455–462CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Ghosh JG, Houck SA, Clark JI, Clark JI (2007) Interactive sequences in the stress protein and molecular chaperone human αB crystallin recognize and modulate the assembly of filaments. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 39(10):1804–1815CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Brandstetter AM, Picard B, Geay Y (1998) Muscle fibre characteristics in four muscles of growing bulls: I. postnatal differentiation. Livestock Prod Sci 53(1):15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    D’Alessandro A, Marrocco C, Rinalducci S, Mirasole C, Failla S, Zolla L (2012) Chianina beef tenderness investigated through integrated omics. J Proteom 75(14):4381–4398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Ouali A, Gagaoua M, Boudida Y, Becila S, Boudjellal A, Herrera-Mendez CH, Sentandreu MA (2013) Biomarkers of meat tenderness: present knowledge and perspectives in regards to our current understanding of the mechanisms involved. Meat Sci 95(4):854–870CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohamed E. Abd El-Hack
    • 1
  • Sameh A. Abdelnour
    • 2
  • Ayman A. Swelum
    • 3
    • 4
  • Muhammad Arif
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Poultry, Faculty of AgricultureZagazig UniversityZagazigEgypt
  2. 2.Department of Animal Production, Faculty of AgricultureZagazig UniversityZagazigEgypt
  3. 3.Department of Animal Production, College of Food and Agriculture SciencesKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia
  4. 4.Department of Theriogenology, Faculty of Veterinary MedicineZagazig UniversityZagazigEgypt
  5. 5.Department of Animal SciencesUniversity College of Agriculture, University of SargodhaSargodhaPakistan

Personalised recommendations