Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Multi-omics fine-mapping uncovers a pleiotropic intestinal enhancer variant linking PMAIP1 regulation to pig growth and fatness

Created on 02 Oct 2026

Authors

Yang, H., Hu, M., Xu, Y., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., Gou, Y., Du, X., Wang, H., Li, X., Zhao, Y., Xiang, T.

Abstract

Genetic loci influencing multiple complex traits often remain difficult to interpret because the underlying functional variants, target genes and tissue contexts are unresolved. Here, we investigated the regulatory basis of a shared signal for average daily gain (ADG) and backfat thickness (BF) in Yorkshire pigs. By integrating GWAS in 7,972 pigs, targeted capture sequencing, LD-based fine-mapping, porcine epigenomic annotations, three-dimensional chromatin interaction maps and functional assays, we narrowed the shared SSC1 signal to a 1.59-Mb interval and functionally prioritized rs334769214 (T>G) as the leading candidate variant. The T>G substitution produced marked allele-specific differences in enhancer activity and nuclear-protein binding, while transcription-factor co-transfection assays identified FOXL1-responsive, allele-dependent regulatory activity. Chromatin interaction and CRISPRa analyses supported a regulatory connection between the rs334769214-containing enhancer and PMAIP1, and PMAIP1 overexpression promoted apoptosis in porcine intestinal epithelial cells. In the capture-sequenced subset, the G allele was associated with higher ADG and BF, consistent with a relative loss-of-activation model. Together, these findings delineate a candidate FOXL1-enhancer-PMAIP1 regulatory pathway and demonstrate how multi-omics fine-mapping can advance a shared quantitative-trait locus toward a testable molecular mechanism underlying variation in growth and fatness.

Preprint server: bioRxiv
The authors list and abstract were imported from bioRxiv on 02 Oct 2026.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this preprint? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 20
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement