| Literature DB >> 18154679 |
Guillaume Côté1, Guy Perry, Pierre Blier, Louis Bernatchez.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quantitative reaction norm theory proposes that genotype-by-environment interaction (GxE) results from inter-individual differences of expression in adaptive suites of genes in distinct environments. However, environmental norms for actual gene suites are poorly documented. In this study, we investigated the effects of GxE interactions on levels of gene transcription and growth by documenting the impact of rearing environment (freshwater vs. saltwater), sex and genotypic (low vs. high estimated breeding value EBV) effects on the transcription level of insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) and growth hormone receptor (GHR) in brook charr (Salvelinus fontinalis).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2007 PMID: 18154679 PMCID: PMC2257973 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2156-8-87
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genet ISSN: 1471-2156 Impact factor: 2.797
Figure 1GH/IGF-1 axis. Illustration of the endocrine axis controlling growth in teleost fish. Multiple hormonal and nutritional factors may stimulate (+) the production and/or modify (+/-) the activity of IGF-1. Negative feedback (-) by IGF-1 inhibits growth hormone secretion by the pituitary.
Results of the mixed-model maximum likelihood analysis of variance for factors explaining absolute growth (g·d-1).
| Absolute growth | |||
| Source of variation | d.f | F | |
| Intercept | 143 | 718.239 | <.0001* |
| Environment | 1 | 22.552 | <.0001* |
| EBV group | 1 | 51.569 | 0.002* |
| Sex | 1 | 9.757 | 0.002* |
| EBV group × environment | 2 | 19.945 | <.0001* |
Asterisks indicate significant effects (α = 0.05).
Figure 2Reaction norm for growth, gene expression and individual transcript efficiencies. Predicted linear means for a) absolute growth, b) relative expression of GHR, c) relative expression of IGF-1 and d, e) individual transcript efficiencies (iTE) for GHR and IGF-1 of males and females of HIGH- and LOW-EBV group reared in freshwater and saltwater (20 ppt) environments. Gene-by-environment interaction between EBVgroup-by-environment for growth and iTEGHR is not clearly illustrated by non-parallel reaction norms because the difference in EBV group within each environment was small, albeit statistically significant.
Absolute growth for male and female of HIGH- and LOW-EBV families reared in freshwater and saltwater environments.
| Absolute growth (g·d-1) | ||||
| Freshwater | Saltwater | |||
| Family | Female | Male | Female | Male |
| LOW-EBV-1 | 0.832 ± 0.127 | 1.518 ± 0.323 | 0.870 ± 0.187 | 0.843 ± 0.162 |
| LOW-EBV-13 | 1.130 ± 0.152 | 1.517 ± 0.187 | 0.806 ± 0.138 | 0.855 ± 0.264 |
| LOW-EBV-20 | 1.491 ± 0.457 | 1.291 ± 0.227 | 0.729 ± 0.162 | 0.961 ± 0.187 |
| HIGH-EBV-7 | 1.361 ± 0.205 | 1.784 ± 0.145 | 1.244 ± 0.173 | 1.291 ± 0.187 |
| HIGH-EBV-15 | 1.712 ± 0.132 | 2.325 ± 0.264 | 1.395 ± 0.145 | 1.901 ± 0.229 |
| HIGH-EBV-24 | 1.856 ± 0.152 | 1.096 ± 0.229 | 1.520 ± 0.264 | 1.750 ± 0.264 |
Values are LS means ± SE. LS means were estimated as linear predictors based on the most parsimonious model. Standard errors for each estimate were determined from a bootstrap distribution (1,000 iterations) of model predictions.
Results of the maximum likelihood analysis of variance in mixed models for factors explaining gene expression.
| GHR | IGF-1 | |||||
| Source of variation | d.f. | F | d.f. | F | ||
| Intercept | 145 | 388.001 | <.0001* | 145 | 299.664 | <.0001* |
| Environment | 1 | 12.005 | 0.001* | 1 | 0.093 | 0.761 |
| EBV group | 1 | 7.170 | 0.055* | 1 | 2.444 | 0.193 |
| Sex | 1 | 13.603 | 0.001* | 1 | 134.533 | <.0001* |
| EBV group × environment | 2 | 3.689 | 0.027* | 2 | 4.066 | 0.019* |
Asterisks indicate significant effects (α = 0.05).
Gene expression of GHR and IGF-1 genes for male and female of HIGH- and LOW-EBV families reared in freshwater and saltwater environments.
| GHR | IGF-1 | |||||||
| Freshwater | Saltwater | Freshwater | Saltwater | |||||
| Family | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male |
| LOW-EBV-1 | 0.687 ± 0.102 | 1.310 ± 0.260 | 0.893 ± 0.150 | 1.09 ± 0.130 | 0.651 ± 0.217 | 1.821 ± 0.554 | 0.557 ± 0.320 | 1.440 ± 0.277 |
| LOW-EBV-13 | 0.400 ± 0.123 | 0.626 ± 0.150 | 0.697 ± 0.106 | 1.83 ± 0.213 | 0.419 ± 0.260 | 2.611 ± 0.320 | 0.365 ± 0.226 | 2.291 ± 0.452 |
| LOW-EBV-20 | 0.205 ± 0.260 | 0.679 ± 0.184 | 0.636 ± 0.130 | 1.02 ± 0.150 | 0.196 ± 0.554 | 2.140 ± 0.391 | 0.338 ± 0.277 | 2.530 ± 0.320 |
| HIGH-EBV-7 | 0.500 ± 0.165 | 0.579 ± 0.116 | 0.679 ± 0.139 | 0.506 ± 0.150 | 0.489 ± 0.350 | 2.503 ± 0.248 | 1.990 ± 0.296 | 1.784 ± 0.320 |
| HIGH-EBV-15 | 0.322 ± 0.106 | 0.549 ± 0.213 | 0.664 ± 0.116 | 1.18 ± 0.184 | 0.495 ± 0.226 | 2.472 ± 0.452 | 0.649 ± 0.248 | 3.362 ± 0.391 |
| HIGH-EBV-24 | 0.612 ± 0.122 | 0.861 ± 0.213 | 0.320 ± 0.184 | 0.659 ± 0.213 | 0.577 ± 0.261 | 2.980 ± 0.452 | 0.273 ± 0.391 | 2.670 ± 0.452 |
Values are LS means ± SE. LS means were estimated as linear predictors based on the most parsimonious model. Standard errors for each estimate were determined from a bootstrap distribution (1,000 iterations) of model predictions.
Results of the maximum likelihood analysis of variance in mixed models for factors explaining individual transcript efficiency (iTE).
| iTE_GHR | iTE_IGF-1 | |||||
| Source of variation | d.f. | F | d.f. | F | ||
| Intercept | 146 | 246.948 | <.0001* | 146 | 29.991 | <.0001* |
| Environment | 1 | 60.215 | <.0001* | 1 | 6.096 | 0.014* |
| EBV group | 1 | 27.786 | 0.006* | 1 | 5.599 | 0.077 |
| Sex | 1 | 3.991 | 0.048* | 1 | 8.699 | 0.004* |
| EBV group × environment | 2 | 17.484 | <.0001* | 2 | 3.060 | 0.050* |
Asterisks indicate significant effects (α = 0.05).
Individual transcript efficiency (iTE) of GHR and IGF-1 for male and female of HIGH- and LOW-EBV families reared in freshwater and saltwater environments.
| iTE_GHR | iTE_IGF-1 | |||||||
| Freshwater | Saltwater | Freshwater | Saltwater | |||||
| Family | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male |
| LOW-EBV-1 | 2.509 ± 0.545 | 1.162 ± 1.39 | 1.210 ± 0.802 | 0.804 ± 0.695 | 3.364 ± 1.112 | 0.831 ± 2.854 | 2.620 ± 1.648 | 0.665 ± 1.427 |
| LOW-EBV-13 | 3.451 ± 0.655 | 2.963 ± 0.802 | 1.380 ± 0.593 | 0.740 ± 1.135 | 4.285 ± 1.345 | 0.588 ± 1.648 | 2.924 ± 1.217 | 0.510 ± 2.330 |
| LOW-EBV-20 | 4.522 ± 1.390 | 1.891 ± 0.983 | 1.441 ± 0.695 | 0.988 ± 0.802 | 4.194 ± 2.854 | 0.676 ± 2.018 | 3.190 ± 1.427 | 0.379 ± 1.648 |
| HIGH-EBV-7 | 3.983 ± 0.879 | 4.272 ± 0.622 | 2.212 ± 0.743 | 4.000 ± 0.802 | 4.880 ± 1.805 | 4.955 ± 1.276 | 1.631 ± 1.525 | 3.920 ± 1.648 |
| HIGH-EBV-15 | 6.122 ± 0.567 | 4.823 ± 1.140 | 2.802 ± 0.622 | 1.860 ± 0.983 | 6.310 ± 1.165 | 0.960 ± 2.330 | 3.661 ± 1.276 | 0.574 ± 2.018 |
| HIGH-EBV-24 | 4.471 ± 0.655 | 2.032 ± 1.140 | 3.391 ± 0.983 | 2.831 ± 1.135 | 5.365 ± 1.345 | 0.557 ± 2.330 | 4.120 ± 2.018 | 0.701 ± 2.323 |
Values are LS means ± SE. LS means were estimated as linear predictors based on the most parsimonious model. Standard errors for each estimate were determined from a bootstrap distribution (1,000 iterations) of model predictions.
Sample information.
| Dam | EBV | Sire | EBV | Family | EBV Group | |
| 126 | -0.253 | 100 | -0.042 | 2 | 52 | |
| 126 | -0.253 | 162 | -0.204 | 3 | 78 | |
| 193 | 0.029 | 162 | -0.204 | 4 | 88 | |
| 193 | 0.029 | 100 | -0.042 | 5 | 90 | |
| 193 | 0.029 | 138 | -0.178 | 6 | 82 | |
| 252 | 0.184 | 249 | 0.313 | 8 | 84 | |
| 252 | 0.184 | 196 | -0.205 | 9 | 79 | |
| 252 | 0.184 | 138 | -0.178 | 10 | 13 | |
| 251 | 0.159 | 177 | 0.081 | 16 | 44 | |
| 231 | -0.049 | 114 | -0.049 | 17 | 93 | |
| 38 | -0.188 | 148 | 0.185 | 21 | 134 | |
| 38 | -0.188 | 177 | 0.081 | 22 | 127 | |
| 135 | -0.048 | 177 | 0.081 | 26 | 55 | |
| 135 | -0.048 | 235 | 0.030 | 27 | 84 |
Rupert strain pedigree, estimated breeding value (EBV) for each dam and sire, number of individuals and family selected in reference to HIGH- and LOW EBV group (in bold characters).
Primers and probes used in RT-qPCR assays of gene expression.
| Target gene | Primer Set (5'→3') | Probe (5'→3') |
| Forward: CAGGCATCCAGATTGTGCAA | CAGCCATTACTCTCTG | |
| Reverse: ACCATGTTCTGAGAATTCCTGTGTT | ||
| Forward: CCCACTGCCCCCTGTATCT | ACCATGGTGGAAGGAG | |
| Reverse: CTTCAGAAGGAGGCTGTTTTGC |
Model selection for absolute growth using a backwards step-wise procedure.
| Absolute growth | |||
| Model | Log likelihood | Test | |
| -107.460 | |||
| ~Env + Sex + EBV·Env + EBV·Sex +Env·Sex (2) | -108.443 | 1 vs. 2 | 0.169 |
| ~Env + Sex + EBV·Env + EBV·Sex (3) | -108.499 | 2 vs. 3 | 0.737 |
| | |||
| ~Env + Sex (5) | -112.465 | 4 vs. 5 | 0.021 |
Progressively simpler models are subsequently defined by removing terms from previous models beginning with interaction effects (e.g. 1 vs. 2). Nested models were tested evaluated using likelihood ratio tests to select the most parsimonious model. The reported p-values correspond to results of the likelihood ratio tests wherein a value greater than the nominal level of significance (α = 0.05) indicates that removal of the model term does not increase model deviance significantly. The final, parsimonious model that was selected is indicated in bold characters (Env = environment, EBV = EBV group).
Model selection for gene expression using a backwards step-wise procedure.
| GHR | IGF-1 | |||||
| Model | Log likelihood | Test | Log likelihood | Test | ||
| -82.617 | -198.918 | |||||
| ~Env + Sex + EBV·Env + EBV·Sex +Env·Sex (2) | -83.111 | 1 vs. 2 | 0.320 | -199.142 | 1 vs. 2 | 0.502 |
| ~Env + Sex + EBV·Env + EBV·Sex (3) | -83.460 | 2 vs. 3 | 0.403 | -199.170 | 2 vs. 3 | 0.815 |
| ~ | ||||||
| ~Env + Sex (5) | -87.055 | 4 vs. 5 | 0.079 | -203.634 | 4 vs. 5 | 0.033 |
Progressively simpler models are subsequently defined by removing terms from previous models beginning with interaction effects (e.g. 1 vs. 2). Nested models were tested evaluated using likelihood ratio tests to select the most parsimonious model. The reported p-values correspond to results of the likelihood ratio tests wherein a value greater than the nominal level of significance indicates that removal of the model term does not increase model deviance significantly. The final, parsimonious model that was selected is indicated in bold characters (Env = environment, EBV = EBV group). In the case of GHR, removal of the EBVxEnv term (model 5) resulted in a marginally non-significant likelihood ratio test. However, the interaction term was retained in the final model (model 4 AIC = 185.02), given that its exclusion resulted in a greater penalised likelihood score (model 5 AIC = 186.11).
Model selection for individual transcript efficiency using a backwards step-wise procedure.
| iTE_GHR | iTE_IGF-1 | |||||
| Model | Log likelihood | Test | Log likelihood | Test | ||
| iTE ~Env + Sex + EBV·Env + EBV·Sex +Env·Sex +EBV·Env·Sex (1) | -297.317 | -436.651 | ||||
| ~Env + Sex + EBV·Env + EBV·Sex +Env·Sex (2) | -297.689 | 1 vs. 2 | 0.388 | -436.657 | 1 vs. 2 | 0.906 |
| ~Env + Sex + EBV·Env + EBV·Sex (3) | -297.945 | 2 vs. 3 | 0.474 | -436.897 | 2 vs. 3 | 0.489 |
| ~ | ||||||
| ~Env + Sex (5) | -302.856 | 4 vs. 5 | 0.012 | -439.672 | 4 vs. 5 | 0.088 |
Progressively simpler models are subsequently defined by removing terms from previous models beginning with interaction effects (e.g. 1 vs. 2). Nested models were tested evaluated using likelihood ratio tests to select the most parsimonious model. The reported p-values correspond to results of the likelihood ratio tests wherein a value greater than the nominal level of significance (α = 0.05) indicates that removal of the model term does not increase model deviance significantly. The final, parsimonious model that was selected is indicated in bold characters (Env = environment, EBV = EBV group). In the case of iTEIGF-1, removal of the EBVxEnv term (model 5) resulted in a marginally non-significant likelihood ratio test. However, the interaction term was retained in the final model (model 4 AIC = 890.47), given that its exclusion resulted in a greater penalised likelihood score (model 5 AIC = 891.34).