>Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 16:36:38 -0500
>To: Zhiliang Hu <zhu@iastate.edu>, Max F Rothschild <mfrothsc@iastate.edu>
>From: Antonio M Ramos <mramos@iastate.edu>
>Subject: Re: One comment on the pig QTL database
>Cc: James M Reecy <jreecy@iastate.edu>
>
>My suggestion is to create a new trait class that could be named
>"carcass composition traits" or "carcass measurements and composition traits".
>Into this new class I would transfer all traits currently listed
>under meat quality, trait type "fatness" (except the ones that
>involve marbling, intramuscular fat and lipid percentage), and all
>traits currently listed under meat quality, trait type "anatomy".
>I believe this would better reflect the type of porcine QTL that
>have been detected so far.
>
>Marcos
>
>
>At 11:43 AM 5/28/2006, Zhiliang Hu wrote:
>>Hi Max,
>>
>>It's a nice concern to be heard but nobody has raised or discussed
>>this since day one.
>>
>>While different views exist as how the trait ontology should be
>>built (in a "section view of ATO": "how the classifications to be
>>made" - as I have been trying hard to seek for help many times for
>>possible input from the community), Marcos may want to join the
>>community efforts
>>(http://www.animalgenome.org/bioinfo/projects/ato/ which is at
>>early stage) to contribute inputs there.
>>
>>At the meantime, personally, I would suggest Marcos do his count of
>>classifications for his thesis/paper writing.
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>Zhiliang
>>
>>
>>At 08:38 AM 5/28/2006, Max F Rothschild wrote:
>>>your point is well taken
>>>
>>>I a unsure why we did it this way.
>>>
>>>Zhiliang
>>>
>>>do you remember discussing this??
>>>
>>>At 07:12 PM 5/27/2006, you wrote:
>>>>Max,
>>>>
>>>>While consulting the pig QTL database for some data on meat
>>>>quality QTL I noticed that all backfat traits are included as
>>>>meat quality traits. I wanted to indicate in the literature
>>>>review the total number of meat quality QTL identified to date,
>>>>but the number is completely overestimated by the inclusion of
>>>>the backfat traits, that account for a significant number of the
>>>>"meat quality" QTL. Another class of traits included under meat
>>>>quality are anatomy traits, including carcass weight and length,
>>>>which is also puzzling for me.
>>>>Anyway, if you have the time to explain why this is, I would
>>>>appreciate it. But it seems to me that another QTL class for
>>>>"carcass composition" traits would divide the distribution of the
>>>>QTL identified by each trait class in a better way.
>>>>Writing is progressing and I will send you the 4/5 of the thesis tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>>Marcos
Received on Tue May 29 15:46:35 2006