NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

View peer-reviewed version

A newer version of this Preprint is available: View the latest version

Supplemental Information

Variants detected in asthmatic and non-asthmatic horses with Genome Analysis Toolkit (GATK)

The Venn diagram was generated with SeqMule to identify variants present in all asthmatics before (red) and after challenge (green), and in non-asthmatics before (turquoise) and after challenge (purple).

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.3491v1/supp-1

Predicted effect of variants in all (left) and coding (right) regions for asthmatic horses before (upper) and after (lower) challenge

Analysis was done using Ensembl Variant Effect Predictor (VEP) tools.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.3491v1/supp-2

Predicted effect of variants from all (left) and coding (right) regions for asthmatic horses before (upper) and after (lower) challenge

Analysis was done using Ensembl Variant Effect Predictor (VEP) tools.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.3491v1/supp-3

Results of analysis of PACRG (A) and RTTN (B) mutations with PolyPhen2 software

Mutations were predicted as probably damaging in PACRG and RTTN proteins with confidence scores of 0.993 and 0.979, respectively.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.3491v1/supp-4

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Laurence Tessier conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Olivier Côté conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Dorothee Bienzle conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Animal Ethics

The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

All procedures were approved by the Institutional Animal Care Committee of the University of Guelph (protocol R10-031) and conducted in compliance with Canadian Council on Animal Care guidelines.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The raw sequences were previously submitted to NCBI sequence read archive (SRA) on May 2nd, 2017, and are publicly available under study PRJNA384774 (SRP106023).

Funding

This work was supported by Equine Guelph and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (no. 051644), and a doctoral scholarship to L. Tessier from the Ontario Veterinary College. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies
  Visitors   Views   Downloads