Additional file 3. Comparison of ROH across the breeds raised in different countries. The higher the value on the y axis, the bigger is the difference. The threshold of Hâ=â5 is indicated with a red line
Additional file 5: Table S2. Inbreeding coefficients (i.e. Fhet, Fhat1, Fhat2 and Fhat3) for populat...
Both natural and artificial selection are among the main driving forces shaping genetic variation ac...
Additional file 5. Genotype distribution of the SNPs detected in the landscape genomics analysis bas...
Additional file 1: Table S1. Animals used for the analyses. Breed symbol, name and number (N). The c...
Additional file 3: Figure S3. Relationship between observed heterozygosity versus (left) ROH coverag...
The AdaptMap consortium.[Background]: Patterns of homozygosity can be influenced by several factors,...
Additional file 4: Table S1. Spearman correlation analysis between genomic inbreeding derived from R...
Additional file 2: Figure S2. PCA plot of 25 insular and continental goats for coordinate PC1 agains...
Additional file 4. Graphical representation of ROH and iHS results at the breed level of the signals...
Additional file 1: Figure S1. Geographic locations of the insular and continental breeds considered ...
Additional file 1: Table S1. Summary statistics calculated over the whole set of AdaptMap goat popul...
Additional file 3: Table S1. Environmental variables considered for the landscape genomic analysis. ...
BACKGROUND Patterns of homozygosity can be influenced by several factors, such as demography, rec...
Additional file 3: Figure S1. Plot of FIS values. Red dots identify populations with statistically s...
Additional file 2: Figure S1. MDS plot of the breeds, grouped by production purpose: milk, meat and ...
Additional file 5: Table S2. Inbreeding coefficients (i.e. Fhet, Fhat1, Fhat2 and Fhat3) for populat...
Both natural and artificial selection are among the main driving forces shaping genetic variation ac...
Additional file 5. Genotype distribution of the SNPs detected in the landscape genomics analysis bas...
Additional file 1: Table S1. Animals used for the analyses. Breed symbol, name and number (N). The c...
Additional file 3: Figure S3. Relationship between observed heterozygosity versus (left) ROH coverag...
The AdaptMap consortium.[Background]: Patterns of homozygosity can be influenced by several factors,...
Additional file 4: Table S1. Spearman correlation analysis between genomic inbreeding derived from R...
Additional file 2: Figure S2. PCA plot of 25 insular and continental goats for coordinate PC1 agains...
Additional file 4. Graphical representation of ROH and iHS results at the breed level of the signals...
Additional file 1: Figure S1. Geographic locations of the insular and continental breeds considered ...
Additional file 1: Table S1. Summary statistics calculated over the whole set of AdaptMap goat popul...
Additional file 3: Table S1. Environmental variables considered for the landscape genomic analysis. ...
BACKGROUND Patterns of homozygosity can be influenced by several factors, such as demography, rec...
Additional file 3: Figure S1. Plot of FIS values. Red dots identify populations with statistically s...
Additional file 2: Figure S1. MDS plot of the breeds, grouped by production purpose: milk, meat and ...
Additional file 5: Table S2. Inbreeding coefficients (i.e. Fhet, Fhat1, Fhat2 and Fhat3) for populat...
Both natural and artificial selection are among the main driving forces shaping genetic variation ac...
Additional file 5. Genotype distribution of the SNPs detected in the landscape genomics analysis bas...