| Literature DB >> 33183224 |
Per Gunnar Fjelldal1, Tom J Hansen2, Anna Wargelius3, Fernando Ayllon3, Kevin A Glover3, Rüdiger W Schulz4, Thomas W K Fraser2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Farmed Atlantic salmon are one of the most economically significant global aquaculture products. Early sexual maturation of farmed males represents a significant challenge to this industry and has been linked with the vgll3 genotype. However, tools to aid research of this topic, such as all-male and clonal fish, are still lacking. The present 6-year study examined if all-male production is possible in Atlantic salmon, a species with heteromorphic sex chromosomes (males being XY, females XX), and if all-male fish can be applied to further explore the vgll3 contribution on the likelihood of early maturation.Entities:
Keywords: All-male; Atlantic salmon; Double haploid; Maturation; Puberty; YY supermale; vgll3
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33183224 PMCID: PMC7664053 DOI: 10.1186/s12863-020-00927-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genet ISSN: 1471-2156 Impact factor: 2.797
Fig. 1Schematic showing the generation of neo-female, supermale and all-male populations
Fig. 2Photographs of the Golden Fish. a Whole fish – female phenotype. b Running milt and ovulated eggs – hermaphrodite. c Gonopore – female phenotype
Occurrence of phenotypic females in the putative all-male populations
| Dam | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sire | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Male offspring (N) | 131 | 121 | 169 | 179 | 163 | 175 | 172 | 176 | 89 |
| Female offspring (N) | 6 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 14 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 0 |
| % males | 95.6 | 97.6 | 95.5 | 99.4 | 92.1 | 98.3 | 96.6 | 98.3 | 100.0 |
Results from models looking at genotype effects on maturity status at the end of the experiment and body size parameters at the beginning of the experiment. Note, the null model had a better fit than genotype for GSI
| Parameter | Genotype | Statistics | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EE | EL | LL | Model | χ | df | p | R | R | |
| Jacking (odds ratio) | 0.97 (0.95–0.99)a | 0.70 (0.66–0.74)b | 0.26 (0.21–0.32)c | GLMER (binomial) | 249 | 2 | < 0.001 | 0.47 | 0.47 |
| GSI (% body mass) - jacks only | 1.94 (1.86–2.02) | 1.86 (1.79–1.94) | 1.86 (1.68–2.04) | LME | – | – | ns | – | – |
| Body mass (g) - day 0 | 128 (124–132)a | 116 (113–119)b | 108 (104–112)c | LME (log) | 119 | 2 | < 0.001 | 0.08 | 0.08 |
| Body condition ( | 1.24 (1.23–1.26)a | 1.24 (1.22–1.25)b | 1.23 (1.21–1.24)c | LME (log) | 24 | 2 | < 0.001 | 0.02 | 0.06 |
Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between genotypes (Post hoc. Least square means, p < 0.05)
Results from models looking for family effects with genotype. Fixed effects with a p value > 0.2 are not shown for clarity, nor lower order fixed effects that are involved in an interaction with a p value < 0.05
| Comparison | Parameter | Model | R | R | Highest order of significance | χ | df | p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EE vs EL | Jacking | GLM (binomial) | Genotype + dam + sire | 0.39 | – | Genotype | 19.0 | 1 | < 0.001 | *** |
| Sire | 38.7 | 1 | < 0.001 | *** | ||||||
| GSI in pubertal fish | LME | Genotype × dam × sire | 0.44 | 0.44 | Genotype × Sire | 4.3 | 1 | 0.039 | * | |
| Genotype × Dam | 2.4 | 1 | 0.123 | |||||||
| Dam × Sire | 9.7 | 1 | 0.002 | ** | ||||||
| Body mass - day 0 | LME (log) | Genotype × dam × sire | 0.09 | 0.09 | Dam × Sire | 10.5 | 1 | 0.001 | ** | |
| Genotype × Dam | 5.2 | 1 | 0.022 | * | ||||||
| Body condition - day 0 | LME (log) | Genotype × dam × sire | 0.20 | 0.28 | Dam | 63.0 | 1 | < 0.001 | *** | |
| Sire | 7.7 | 1 | 0.005 | ** | ||||||
| Dam × Sire | 2.7 | 1 | 0.098 | |||||||
| EL vs LL | Jacking | GLMER (binomial) | Genotype × dam × sire | 0.15 | 0.16 | Dam | 9.2 | 1 | 0.002 | ** |
| Sire | 6.0 | 1 | 0.014 | * | ||||||
| GSI in pubertal fish | LME | Genotype × dam × sire | 0.77 | 0.79 | Genotype × Dam × Sire | 5.1 | 1 | 0.024 | * | |
| Body mass - day 0 | LME | Genotype × dam × sire | 0.03 | 0.03 | Dam | 6.5 | 1 | 0.011 | * | |
| Sire | 2.9 | 1 | 0.086 | |||||||
| Body condition - day 0 | LME | Genotype × dam × sire | 0.06 | 0.07 | Dam × Sire | 10.9 | 1 | < 0.001 | *** | |
| EL | Jacking | GLM (binomial) | Dam + sire | 0.42 | – | Dam | 183.6 | 3 | < 0.001 | *** |
| Sire | 44.1 | 1 | < 0.001 | *** | ||||||
| GSI in pubertal fish | LME | Dam × sire | 0.39 | 0.39 | Dam × sire | 16.8 | 3 | < 0.001 | *** | |
| Body mass (g) - day 0 | LME (log) | Dam × sire | 0.19 | 0.21 | Dam × sire | 11.3 | 3 | 0.010 | * | |
| Body condition (K factor) - day 0 | LME | Dam × sire | 0.19 | 0.21 | Dam × sire | 12.9 | 3 | 0.005 | ** | |
*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05
Results from lsmeans tests looking at genotype effects when accounting for dam and sire effects. The main model results can be found in Table 3. The data presented are lsmeans (lower and upper confidence intervals)
| Parameter | EE | EL | LL | Estimate/ratio | SE | df | z/t ratio | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jacking (odds ratio) | 0.986 (0.970–0.994) | 0.939 (0.900–0.964) | – | 4.6 | 1.80 | Inf | 3.93 | < 0.001 | *** |
| GSI (% body mass) - jacks only | 1.84 (1.78–1.91) | 1.71 (1.65–1.78) | – | 0.1 | 0.03 | 636 | 4.01 | < 0.001 | *** |
| Body mass (g) - day 0 | 120 (117–123) | 123 (119–126) | – | 1.0 | 0.01 | 681 | −1.70 | 0.090 | |
| Body condition (K factor) - day 0 | 1.24 (1.23–1.26) | 1.24 (1.23–1.26) | – | 1.0 | 0.003 | 681 | −0.09 | 0.930 | |
| Jacking (odds ratio) | – | 0.450 (0.386–0.516) | 0.246 (0.195–0.306) | 2.5 | 0.49 | Inf | 4.69 | < 0.001 | *** |
| GSI (% body mass) - jacks only | – | 1.99 (1.85–2.13) | 1.78 (1.63–1.94) | 0.2 | 0.07 | 201 | 2.76 | 0.006 | ** |
| Body mass (g) - day 0 | – | 110 (107–113) | 109 (106–113) | 0.4 | 1.79 | 569 | 0.23 | 0.819 | |
| Body condition ( | – | 1.23 (1.22–1.24) | 1.23 (1.22–1.24) | 0.003 | 0.004 | 569 | 0.65 | 0.513 | |
*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05
Fig. 3Dam and sire effects on maturity status at the end of the experiment and body size and condition at the start of the experiment. Data are means +/− 95% CI
Fig. 4The timeline for production of the different fish groups used in the current study. The period marked with red is the period where the all-male fish were reared under continuous light and 16C to stimulate jacking