Table 3.
Runs of homozygosity (ROH) islands identified in the genomes of the studied chicken breeds1
| GGA | No. of ROH islands | Coverage by ROH islands, Mb | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OMF | RUW | USH | WCR | OMF | RUW | USH | WCR | |
| 1 | 12 | 5 | 33 | 4 | 11.927 | 5.594 | 67.422 | 6.584 |
| 2 | 9 | 2 | 22 | 7 | 9.986 | 2.415 | 50.988 | 8.074 |
| 3 | 8 | 4 | 16 | 1 | 6.731 | 3.222 | 17.116 | 0.463 |
| 4 | 4 | 3 | 20 | 2 | 2.491 | 3.739 | 34.117 | 1.513 |
| 5 | 3 | 1 | 12 | – | 2.334 | 0.903 | 17.723 | 3.240 |
| 6 | – | – | 2 | – | – | – | 3.931 | – |
| 7 | 6 | – | 11 | 1 | 5.201 | – | 19.405 | 0.571 |
| 8 | 1 | – | 6 | 1 | 0.883 | – | 7.851 | 0.586 |
| 9 | 1 | 1 | 3 | – | 0.530 | 0.525 | 4.776 | – |
| 10 | 2 | – | 3 | – | 0.952 | – | 7.785 | – |
| 11 | 2 | – | 7 | – | 1.242 | – | 9.060 | – |
| 12 | 5 | 1 | 5 | – | 3.192 | 0.640 | 8.495 | – |
| 13 | – | – | 3 | – | – | – | 2.618 | – |
| 14 | 1 | – | 3 | – | 0.700 | – | 4.070 | – |
| 15 | – | – | 2 | – | – | – | 2.406 | – |
| 18 | – | – | 1 | 1 | – | – | 1.506 | 0.789 |
| 19 | – | – | 3 | – | – | – | 2.623 | – |
| 20 | – | – | 3 | – | – | – | 2.223 | – |
| 21 | – | – | 1 | – | – | – | 0.769 | – |
| 26 | 1 | – | 2 | – | 0.828 | – | 0.919 | – |
| 27 | – | – | 1 | – | – | – | 1.978 | – |
| 28 | – | – | 4 | 1 | – | – | 3.338 | 0.679 |
| Total | 55 | 17 | 165 | 19 | 46.998 | 17.038 | 272.987 | 22.500 |
| Mean length (M ± SE) | 1.821 ± 0.064ab | 1.891 ± 0.143ac | 2.638 ± 0.132 | 2.075 ± 0.183bc | ||||
1 Breeds: OMF Orloff Mille Fleur, RUW Russian White, USH Ushanka, WCR White Cornish. M Mean value, SE Standard error. Mean values with the same superscript have no significant difference