| Literature DB >> 28219347 |
Hisham Abdelrahman1, Mohamed ElHady2, Acacia Alcivar-Warren3, Standish Allen4, Rafet Al-Tobasei5, Lisui Bao1, Ben Beck6, Harvey Blackburn7, Brian Bosworth8, John Buchanan9, Jesse Chappell1, William Daniels1, Sheng Dong1, Rex Dunham1, Evan Durland10, Ahmed Elaswad1, Marta Gomez-Chiarri11, Kamal Gosh1, Ximing Guo12, Perry Hackett13, Terry Hanson1, Dennis Hedgecock14, Tiffany Howard1, Leigh Holland1, Molly Jackson15, Yulin Jin1, Karim Khalil1, Thomas Kocher16, Tim Leeds17, Ning Li1, Lauren Lindsey1, Shikai Liu1, Zhanjiang Liu18, Kyle Martin19, Romi Novriadi1, Ramjie Odin1, Yniv Palti17, Eric Peatman1, Dina Proestou20, Guyu Qin1, Benjamin Reading21, Caird Rexroad22, Steven Roberts23, Mohamed Salem5, Andrew Severin24, Huitong Shi1, Craig Shoemaker6, Sheila Stiles25, Suxu Tan1, Kathy F J Tang26, Wilawan Thongda1, Terrence Tiersch27, Joseph Tomasso1, Wendy Tri Prabowo1, Roger Vallejo17, Hein van der Steen28, Khoi Vo1, Geoff Waldbieser8, Hanping Wang29, Xiaozhu Wang1, Jianhai Xiang30, Yujia Yang1, Roger Yant31, Zihao Yuan1, Qifan Zeng1, Tao Zhou1.
Abstract
Advancing the production efficiency and profitability of aquaculture is dependent upon the ability to utilize a diverse array of genetic resources. The ultimate goals of aquaculture genomics, genetics and breeding research are to enhance aquaculture production efficiency, sustainability, product quality, and profitability in support of the commercial sector and for the benefit of consumers. In order to achieve these goals, it is important to understand the genomic structure and organization of aquaculture species, and their genomic and phenomic variations, as well as the genetic basis of traits and their interrelationships. In addition, it is also important to understand the mechanisms of regulation and evolutionary conservation at the levels of genome, transcriptome, proteome, epigenome, and systems biology. With genomic information and information between the genomes and phenomes, technologies for marker/causal mutation-assisted selection, genome selection, and genome editing can be developed for applications in aquaculture. A set of genomic tools and resources must be made available including reference genome sequences and their annotations (including coding and non-coding regulatory elements), genome-wide polymorphic markers, efficient genotyping platforms, high-density and high-resolution linkage maps, and transcriptome resources including non-coding transcripts. Genomic and genetic control of important performance and production traits, such as disease resistance, feed conversion efficiency, growth rate, processing yield, behaviour, reproductive characteristics, and tolerance to environmental stressors like low dissolved oxygen, high or low water temperature and salinity, must be understood. QTL need to be identified, validated across strains, lines and populations, and their mechanisms of control understood. Causal gene(s) need to be identified. Genetic and epigenetic regulation of important aquaculture traits need to be determined, and technologies for marker-assisted selection, causal gene/mutation-assisted selection, genome selection, and genome editing using CRISPR and other technologies must be developed, demonstrated with applicability, and application to aquaculture industries.Major progress has been made in aquaculture genomics for dozens of fish and shellfish species including the development of genetic linkage maps, physical maps, microarrays, single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays, transcriptome databases and various stages of genome reference sequences. This paper provides a general review of the current status, challenges and future research needs of aquaculture genomics, genetics, and breeding, with a focus on major aquaculture species in the United States: catfish, rainbow trout, Atlantic salmon, tilapia, striped bass, oysters, and shrimp. While the overall research priorities and the practical goals are similar across various aquaculture species, the current status in each species should dictate the next priority areas within the species. This paper is an output of the USDA Workshop for Aquaculture Genomics, Genetics, and Breeding held in late March 2016 in Auburn, Alabama, with participants from all parts of the United States.Entities:
Keywords: Aquaculture; Fish; Genetic resources; Genome; QTL; RNA-Seq; SNP; Shellfish; Transcriptome
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28219347 PMCID: PMC5319170 DOI: 10.1186/s12864-017-3557-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Some examples of whole genome sequencing of aquatic and aquaculture species
| Species | References |
|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Atlantic Cod | Star et al. 2011 [ |
| Bluegill sunfish | Wang, personal communication |
| California yellowtail | Severin, Purcell, Hyde, personal communication |
| Cavefish | McGaugh et al. 2014 [ |
| Coelacanth | Amemiya et al. 2013 [ |
| Common carp | Xu et al. 2014b [ |
| Indian catfish | Das, personal communication |
| Japanse flounder | Chen, Yellow Sea Fisheries Institute, China, personal communication |
| Grass carp | Wang et al. 2015 [ |
| Lamprey | Smith et al. 2013 [ |
| Medaka | Kasahara et al. 2007 [ |
| Pacific abalone | Severin, Purcell, Hyde, personal communication |
| Pearl oyster | Du, personal communication |
| Platyfish | Schartl et al. 2013 [ |
| Rohu carp | Das, personal communication |
| Sea bass | Tine et al. 2014 [ |
| Scallops | Bao, Ocean University of China, personal communication |
| Sea cucumber | Xiang, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China, personal communication |
| Shark | Venkatesh et al. 2014 [ |
| Sole | Chen et al. 2014 [ |
| Stickleback | Jones et al. 2012 [ |
| Striped bass | Reading, 2016, personal communication |
| Tetraodon | Jaillon et al. 2004 [ |
| Turbot | Figueras et al. 2016 [ |
| White bass | Reading, 2016, personal communication |
| Yellow croaker | Wu et al. 2014 [ |
| Yellow perch | Wang, personal communication |
| Zebrafish | Howe et al. 2013 [ |
Bold data are the species initially included in the NRSP-8 Project (Alcivar-Warren et al. 1997)
Status of whole genome sequencing and assembly of major aquaculture species in the United States, listed in the order of scaffold N50 sizes
| Species | Contig N50 [ | Scaffold N50 (Mb) | Scaffolds | % on chromosome | Sequencing platform | Total size (Mb) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catfish | 77.2 | 7.73 | 9974 | 97.2 | Illumina, PacBio | 783 | Liu et al. 2016 [ |
| 99.1 | Zeng et al. 2017 [ | ||||||
| Atlantic Salmon | 57.6 | 2.97 | 843,055 | 75.4 | Sanger, Illumina, PacBio | 2970 | Lien et al. 2016 [ |
| Tilapia | 29.3 | 2.80 | - | 70.9 | Illumina, PacBio | 928 | Brawand et al. 2014 [ |
| 3090 | - | 86.9 | 1010 | Conte et al. 2016, PC | |||
| Eastern oyster | 1.59 | 2.50 | 849 | In progress | PacBio, Illumina | 819 | Wes Warren, PC |
| Rainbow trout | 7.7 | 0.38 | 54.0 | Illumina | 1900 | Brawand et al. 2014 [ | |
| 13.9 | 1.72 | 82.0 | 2178 | ||||
| Zebrafish | 25.0 | 1.55 | 96.5 | Sanger, Illumina | 1410 | Howe et al. 2013 [ | |
| California yellowtail | 139.3 | 1.49 | 4439 | - | Illumina | 685 | Andrew Severin, PC |
| PacBio | |||||||
| Pacific white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) | 57.1 | 0.66 | 6007 | 71.6 | Illumina | 1779 | Jianhai Xiang, 2016, PC |
| PacBio | |||||||
| Pacific oyster | 19.4 | 0.4 | 11,969 | - | Illumina | 559 | Zhang et al. 2012b [ |
| Striped bass | 20.9 | 0.03 | 35,010 | - | Illumina | 585 | Benjamin Reading, 2016, PC |
| PacBio | |||||||
| White bass (male/female) | In process | In process | 56,818/57,533 | - | Illumina | 644/643 | Benjamin Reading, 2016, PC |
| Pacific abalone | In process | In process | - | - | Illumina | 2000 | Severin, Purcell, Hyde, PC |
| Yellow perch (male/female) | In process | In process | - | - | Illumina | 1380/1240 | Haping Wang, PC |
Zebrafish is included as a reference. PC: personal communications
Examples of additional work to enhance the utility of the whole genome reference sequences of major aquaculture species in the United States
| Species | Contiguity, completion, and accuracy | Anchoring sequence to chromosomes | Sex chromosome sequencing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Catfish | + | + | Y chromosome need to be sequenced |
| Atlantic salmon | ++ | ++ | Y chromosome need to be sequenced |
| Tilapia | + | + | |
| Rainbow trout | ++ | +++ | |
| California yellowtail | ++ | +++++ | |
| Pacific oyster | +++ | +++ | |
| Striped bass | ++++ | +++++ | |
| White bass | ++++ | +++++ | |
| Eastern oyster | +++ | ++++ | |
| Shrimp | +++ | +++ | |
| Pacific abalone | +++ | +++++ |
+ indicate some additional work required, and additional “+” signs indicate the level of additional work required; additional “+” signs indicate larger amount of improvements are needed
Some examples of SNPs identified from the aquaculture species under NRSP-8
| Species | SNPs from genome sequencing | Numbers of SNPs | Method of identification | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catfish | None | 8.3 million | Genome re-sequencing, transcriptome sequencing | Sun et al. 2014 [ |
| Liu et al. 2012 [ | ||||
| Rainbow trout | None | 145,168 | RAD sequencing | Palti et al. 2014 [ |
| 5052 | RNA-Seq | Christensen et al. 2013 [ | ||
| 50,000 | RNA-Seq | Palti et al. 2015 [ | ||
| 1.8 million | Genome re-sequencing | |||
| Atlantic salmon | None | 9.7 million | Genome re-sequencing | Yáñez et al. 2016 [ |
| Tilapia | Yes | 3569 | Genome re-sequencing | Van Bers et al. 2012 [ |
| Striped bass | Yes | - | RNA-Seq | Li et al. 2014 [ |
| Pacific oyster | Yes | 3.8 million | Genome re-sequencing | Zhang et al., 2012 [ |
| 4122 | RNA-Seq | Hedgecock et al. 2015 [ | ||
| Pacific white shrimp | Yes | 96,040 | RNA-Seq | Yu et al. 2014 [ |
Those SNPs identified from genome sequencing are not included here
Development of high density SNP arrays in aquaculture species, PC: personal communications
| Species | SNP array technology | SNP array density | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Atlantic salmon | Illumina iSelect technology | 15 K | Gidskehaug et al. 2011 [ |
| Affymetrix Axiom technology | 286 K | Houston et al. 2014 [ | |
| Affymetrix Axiom technology | 930 K | Lien et al. 2016 [ | |
| Catfish | Affymetrix Axiom technology | 250 K | Liu et al. 2014 [ |
| Affymetrix Axiom technology | 690 K | Zeng et al. 2017 [ | |
| Common carp | Affymetrix Axiom technology | 250 K | Xu et al. 2014 [ |
| Rainbow trout | Affymetrix Axiom technology | 57 K | Palti et al. 2015 [ |
| Affymetrix Axiom technology | 50 K | Salem et al. PC |
Examples of genetic linkage maps in aquaculture species, with the species under the NRSP-8 in bold
| Species | Number and type of markers | Mapping population | Unique map positions | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asian seabass | 790 microsatellites and SNPs | 93 fish from two families | 501 | Wang et al. 2011 [ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Common carp | 28,194 SNPs | 108 fish from one yellow river carp family | 14,146 | Peng et al. 2016 [ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| European seabass | 190 microsatellites, 176 AFLP, 2 SNP | 50 fish from one Venezia Fbis family | - | Chistiakov et al. 2008 [ |
| Grass carp | 279 microsatellites and SNPs | 192 progenies from two families | 245 | Xia et al. 2010 [ |
| Japanese flounder | 1268 microsatellites, 105 SNPs, 2 genes | 45 offspring from one family | 235 in male genetic map, 184 in female genetic map | Castaño-Sánchez et al. 2010 [ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Scallop | 3806 SNPs | 96 progenies from one Farrer’s scallop family | 2983 | Jiao et al. 2013 [ |
| Sea bream | 321 microsatellites, ESTs, and SNPs | 50 individuals from one family | 229 | Tsigenopoulos et al. 2014 [ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Yellowtail | 217 microsatellites | 90 progenies from one family | 105 in female genetic map, 83 in male genetic map | Ohara et al. 2005 [ |
| 1480 microsatellites and 601 SNPs | 94 offspring of one family | - | Aoki et al. 2015 [ | |
| 6275 SNPs | 460 individuals from five wild families | - | Ozaki et al. 2016 [ |
Examples of physical maps constructed from aquaculture species
| Species with physical maps | References |
|---|---|
| Atlantic salmon | Ng et al. 2005 [ |
| Tilapia | Katagiri et al. 2005 [ |
| Channel catfish | Xu et al. 2007 [ |
| Quiniou et al. 2007 [ | |
| Pacific oyster | Gaffney, 2008 [ |
| Rainbow trout | Palti et al. 2009 [ |
| Common carp | Xu et al. 2011 [ |
| Pacific white shrimp | Yu et al. 2015 [ |
| Asian seabass | Xia et al. 2010 [ |
| Scallop | Zhang et al. 2011 [ |
EST resources of selected aquaculture species (with >10,000 ESTs)
| Species | Number of ESTs |
|---|---|
| Danio rerio (zebrafish) | 1,488,275 |
| Ciona intestinalis | 1,205,674 |
| Xenopus laevis (African clawed frog) | 677,911 |
| Oryzias latipes (Japanese medaka) | 666,891 |
| Salmo salar (Atlantic salmon) | 498,245 |
| Ictalurus punctatus (channel catfish) | 354,516 |
| Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout) | 287,564 |
| Morone saxatilis (striped bass) | 230,151 |
| Crassostrea gigas | 206,388 |
| Litopenaeus vannamei | 161,248 |
| Ictalurus furcatus | 139,475 |
| Oreochromis niloticus (Nile tilapia) | 120,991 |
| Petromyzon marinus (sea lamprey) | 120,731 |
| Sparus aurata | 79,216 |
Zebrafish is included as a reference
QTL studies in selected aquaculture species with major US aquaculture species in bold
| Species | Traits | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Arctic charr | Body weight and sexual maturation; Salinity tolerance | Küttner et al. 2011 [ |
| Norman et al. 2011 [ | ||
| Asian seabass | Resistance against viral nervous necrosis disease | Liu et al. 2016 [ |
| Growth-related traits | Wang et al. 2006 [ | |
| Omega-3 fatty acids | Xia et al. 2014 [ | |
|
|
|
|
|
| [ | |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Common carp | Muscle fiber traits | Zhang et al. 2011 [ |
| Morphometric traits | Boulton et al. 2011 [ | |
| Swimming ability | Laghari et al. 2014 [ | |
|
|
|
|
| European seabass | Growth, body weight | Louro et al. 2016 [ |
| Morphometric traits and stress response | Massault et al. 2010 [ | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Japanese flounder | Vibrio anguillarum resistance | Wang et al. 2014 [ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Gilthead seabream | Skeletal deformities | Negrín-Báez et al. 2015 [ |
| Sex determination and body growth | Loukovitis et al. 2011 [ | |
| Resistance to fish pasteurellosis | Massault et al. 2011 [ | |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Turbot | Growth traits | Sánchez-Molano et al. 2011 [ |
| Aeromonas resistance | Rodríguez-Ramilo et al. 2011 [ | |
| Resistance against Philasterides | Rodríguez‐Ramilo et al. 2013 [ | |
| Resistance to viral haemorrhagic septicaemia | Rodríguez-Ramilo et al. 2014 [ | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig. 1Schematic presentation of the goals and current status of aquaculture genomics and genetics research. The major aquaculture species in the United States are grouped into teleost fish and invertebrate species, with the species names listed in the first column. Major milestones of research goals are listed in the first row, while current status for each species is indicated in the appropriate cells with various colors: Dark green: good status; light green, outstanding progress has been made, but additional work still needed; dark yellow: significant progress has been made, but significant amount of additional work still needed; light yellow, some progress has been made
Current status of breeding technologies in U.S. commercial aquaculture
| Species | Status |
|---|---|
| Catfish | Private sector efforts to conduct genetic enhancement programs appear to have been successful, but the private sector has not made a great effort in genetics and breeding. Currently, some on-farm selection is practiced, but not in a very controlled manner. Genetic improvement is primarily conducted by public sector research programs, which has resulted in 7 releases to the industry of varying impacts. Most of these fish populations were developed by mass selection and in some cases family selection with the most emphasis on growth rate. Advanced genomic tools and technologies are available but have yet to be implemented by industry. |
| The industry has widely adopted the channel female x blue male interspecific catfish hybrid which demonstrates significantly greater performance for numerous traits in comparison to the traditionally grown channel catfish with hybrids now comprising 60–70% of the industry. The vast majority of hybrids are produced with a single line of blue catfish. | |
| Atlantic salmon | Private sector breeding is integrated with a publicly funded research program. Genetic improvement is based on quantitative genetics to improve growth, fillet quality and disease traits. Due to international interest in this species advanced genome tools and technologies are widely available, their implementation in the U.S. was recently initiated in a public/private partnership with efforts to incorporate MAS for sea lice resistance. |
| In 2015 the AquAdvantage Salmon was approved for sale in the U.S. by FDA, however it is expected to reach the marketplace in 2017. | |
| Rainbow trout | Public sector breeding programs utilize quantitative genetics to select for growth performance and disease resistance in all-female populations. Chromosome set manipulation is used to provide all-female triploids for net pen operations that require sterile fish; they are also valued for their superior growth characteristics at larger sizes. |
| Publically funded research programs have released germplasm improved for growth and disease resistance characteristics. Advanced genome tools and technologies are widely available and have been implemented into the private sector. Proof of concept studies for genomic selection for disease resistance in a research population have motivated initial implementation in a commercial breeding population. | |
| Tilapia | Private sector family based breeding for Nile tilapia for improved growth, yield and disease resistance is enhanced through publicly funded research programs. Although genome tools and technologies are available, they have not yet been implemented by the private sector. |
| Striped bass | Private sector fingerling producers incorporate germplasm from wild caught and captive (domestic) populations. Significant genetic improvement has been achieved through the production of hybrids created primarily by crossing domestic striped bass males x domestic or wild caught white bass females, with parental species improvement achieved primarily via mass selection techniques. Genomic technologies are under development and have not yet incorporated into commercial breeding, although domestic striped bass and white bass are available through a publically funded research program. |
| Oysters | The Pacific oyster industry is supported through public and private programs for ploidy manipulation, family-based selection and crossbreeding. Polyploid and improved broodstocks are widely used by the U.S. West Coast industry. Genetic improvement of the eastern oyster is publically funded. For much of the past 40 years, improvements in eastern oyster growth and survival have been realized using mass-selection techniques; however, there has been a recent shift toward applying quantitative genetics and ploidy manipulation to enhance production traits. Broodstock from these breeding programs are widely used by the private sector in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic. Genome tools for both oyster species are coming online, but have not yet been implemented. |
| Shrimp | Shrimp breeders in the public and private sector selectively breed to produce specific pathogen resistant shrimp. |