Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-vmclg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-19T12:40:03.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Application of genetics and genomics to aquaculture development: current and future directions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2010

B. McANDREW*
Affiliation:
Genetics and Reproduction Research Group, Institute of Aquaculture, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK
J. NAPIER
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Chemistry, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, Herts Al5 2JQ, UK
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: b.j.mcandrew@stir.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Global aquaculture production continues to grow rapidly yet a small proportion of the animals and plants being used come from managed breeding and improvement programmes. The biology of aquatic organisms offer many opportunities for rapid genetic gains as new genetic and genomic techniques make the management of improvement programmes feasible in a wider range of species. The current paper describes the application of a wide range of techniques, many unique to aquatic organisms, and their potential to secure aquaculture production in the future.

Type
Foresight Project on Global Food and Farming Futures
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

INTRODUCTION

Aquaculture production has grown from less than 1 million tonnes (t) in the 1950s to nearly 60 million t in 2008 (FAO 2009). However, production of many species still depends on wild-caught fry or broodstock: 0·86 of the 69 farmed Chinese freshwater species (Honglang Reference Honglang and Bondad-Reantaso2007) come from wild-caught fish. For domesticated stocks, there is growing evidence that traditional breeding approaches seriously degrade the genetic quality without continuous replacement by wild or managed fish (Mair et al. Reference Mair, Nam, Solar, Kapuscinski, Hayes, Li and Dana2007). Less than 0·05 of production was estimated to come from scientifically managed breeding programmes (Gjedrem Reference Gjedrem2005).

The history of fish genetics has been reviewed by Dunham (Reference Dunham2004) and Gjedrem (Reference Gjedrem2005). A range of attributes has been targeted, including growth, maturation, environmental tolerance and disease resistance. Advantages for genetic gain include external fertilization and high fecundity, allowing a large number of gametes to be collected and fertilized under controlled conditions. Breeding designs with large family sizes can be constructed, allowing better estimates of genetic parameters and high-selection pressures, and improvements can be passed on quickly to industry. Many species are still close to being wild organisms and display high levels of genetic variation; heritabilities are medium to high across a wide range of traits. Aquatic organisms are susceptible to environmental manipulation and a single genotype can potentially have many phenotypes. Single-sex populations can dramatically boost production. The phenotypic sex of many species can be changed by administering sex hormones during the sexually labile period of development, single-sex stock being generated directly or through controlled breeding of sex-reversed individuals. Other major traits such as the onset of sexual maturity can be advanced or delayed by the manipulation of daylength.

The new ‘-omic’ (e.g. genomic and proteomic) tools have also been applied in a wide range of species, though with few practical applications as yet. More widely in the development of productive and cost-effective aquaculture, genetic applications for developing high-quality feed inputs have great significance, progress in which is described in the final section of the present review.

SELECTIVE BREEDING

The species that have seen the most improvement are common carp, rainbow trout, Atlantic salmon and tilapia, channel catfish and ornamental fishes. Modern programmes for carp were established in Central and Eastern Europe (Kirpichnikov Reference Kirpichnikov1981), and improved strains contribute to the bulk of European and Asian production, with programmes to further develop these in Vietnam and India (Penman et al. Reference Penman, Gupta and Dey2005). Recent studies have shown that cross breeding and pedigree-based selection can still produce improvements (Vandeputte Reference Vandeputte2009).

Rainbow trout has also had a long history of domestication, in the USA (Gall & Huang Reference Gall and Huang1988), Norway (selected for seawater production) (Gjedrem Reference Gjedrem1992), Finland (Kause et al. Reference Kause, Ritola, Paananen, Mäntysaari and Eskelinen2003) and Denmark (Henryon et al. Reference Henryon, Jokumsen, Berg, Lund, Pedersen, Olesen and Slierendrecht2002). But the uptake of selected strains by the industry has been slow; for instance, the largest commercial US egg supplier, Trout Lodge, only started a family-based breeding programme within the last 5 years. Short-term improvements such as all-female production or all-female triploids have been adopted but most eggs still come from mass-selected domesticated strains.

Norwegian Atlantic salmon programmes were initially government funded, but are now run by private companies (Aquagen and Salmobreed; Gjedrem Reference Gjedrem2005). Individual and family performance is assessed for a range of commercial traits (growth, sexual maturation and body conformation) and, more recently, disease resistance (infectious pancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV), Aeromonas, infectious salmon anaemia (ISA)). Estimated gains are between 8 and 10% per generation (Gjoen & Bentsen Reference Gjoen and Bentsen1997). Similar programmes have also been developed by Landcatch Natural Selection in Scotland and Chile, Stofnfiskcur in Iceland and Aquachile in Chile. Most farmed eggs now come from scientific breeding programmes, with significantly improved performance. Genomic technologies, including quantitative trait loci (QTL) and marker-assisted selection (MAS) approaches, are already benefiting improved virus resistance (Houston et al. Reference Houston, Haley, Hamilton, Guy, Tinch, Taggart, McAndrew and Bishop2008; Moen et al. Reference Moen, Baranski, Sonesson and Kjøglum2009).

Tilapia have become the second most important group of farmed fish in the world (>2·7 million t in 2008) with Oreochromis niloticus becoming the dominant species in fresh water. Early selection work was hindered by the degraded nature of many of the commercial strains being used. The Genetically Improved Farm Tilapia (GIFT) programme, starting in 1987 in the Philippines, systematically compared wild and commercial strains in a variety of aquaculture environments and began family-based selection for growth. The work was further developed by Worldfish (CGIAR, see Acosta & Gupta Reference Acosta, Gupta, De Silva and Davy2010). Other programmes have either used the GIFT strain as a starting point (Genomar 2008) or have constructed new synthetic populations using a number of selected lines (Rutten et al. Reference Rutten, Komen and Bovenhuis2005). The bulk of tilapia production, however, does not come from improved sources and producers use direct hormone sex-reversal of mixed sex fry to produce phenotypic all-male populations to overcome problems of excessive fry production during growout (see Beveridge & McAndrew Reference Beveridge and McAndrew2000).

Selective breeding programmes have been more recently applied to other marine high-value species: European sea bass, Gilthead sea bream and Turbot. By 2005 it was assumed that as much as 0·80 of the European sea bass production already came from commercial populations which had undergone some level of genetic improvement and at least one major Greek company has initiated (in 2002) a large-scale family-based selective breeding programme on sea bream. Programmes on other high-value species, such as cod, halibut and tuna, are also under way.

HYBRIDIZATION

The ease of gamete collection in fish means that there are many references to inter-specific and inter-generic hybridization and the potential for using hybrids in aquaculture (Bartley et al. Reference Bartley, Rana and Immink2001). Hybrids have become important at the national level in several countries, e.g. O. niloticus×Oreochromis aureus in Israel because of the skewed male sex ratio and cold tolerance of the hybrid (Hulata et al. Reference Hulata, Wohlfarth, Karplus, Schroeder, Harpaz, Halevy, Rothbard, Cohen, Israel and Kavessa1993). In the USA, the sunshine bass (Morone chrysops×Morone saxatilis) grows faster and has better overall culture characteristics than either parental species under commercial culture conditions (Smith Reference Smith1988). However, despite the large numbers of reported hybrids few have been successfully cultured for extended periods because of the added complexity of production or because of introgression of the hybrid back into the parental species and loss of beneficial characteristics.

CHROMOSOME SET MANIPULATION

A range of genetic and environmental manipulations can be applied to aquatic species. If normally fertilized eggs are heat or pressure shocked at the 2nd meiotic division, a triploid (3n) embryo, containing three chromosome sets, is produced. Protocols are now available for over 30 different fish and shellfish species (Dunham Reference Dunham2004). Triploids are effectively sterile and are used in the production of larger rainbow trout, usually from all-female strains (Bye & Lincoln Reference Bye and Lincoln1986), channel catfish (Wolters et al. Reference Wolters, Lilyestrom and Craig1991), common carp (Basavaraju et al. Reference Basavaraju, Mair, Mohan Kumar, Pradeep Kumar, Keshavappa and Penman2002) and in other species whose maturation slows growth. They are also used to improve growth rate and flesh quality in oysters (Guo et al. Reference Guo, DeBrosse and Allen1996). Triploids can be used to reduce the risk of stocked or escaped farmed strains interbreeding with native populations (Kozfkay et al. Reference Kozfkay, Dillon and Schill2006) or exotic species, such as grass carp for aquatic weed control, becoming established (Wattendorf Reference Watterdorf1986). Triploid sterility is also proposed to stop impacts from escaped transgenic fish (Mair et al. Reference Mair, Nam, Solar, Kapuscinski, Hayes, Li and Dana2007). A shock at first mitotic division will produce a tetraploid embryo with four sets of chromosomes (4n). Male 4ns produce diploid sperm and can be crossed with normal fish to produce 3n directly avoiding having to shock large numbers of eggs, e.g. for rainbow trout (Myers et al. Reference Myers, Hershberger and Iwamoto1986).

Techniques for parthenogenesis can derive offspring from wholly maternal or paternal origins (Komen & Thorgaard Reference Komen and Thorgaard2007). These use gamma or ultraviolet radiation to destroy the nuclear DNA in eggs or sperm; the treated gamete is then fused with an untreated sperm or egg to produce a haploid embryo, which can be made diploid by inhibiting the second meiotic (meiotic gynogenetic) or first mitotic division (mitotic gynogenetic or androgenetic). Although still mainly used as research tools they can generate unique genotypes for analysing complex traits or generating new strains. Containing sufficient DNA, haploid embryos can be used for gene-mapping (Kocher et al. Reference Kocher, Lee, Sobolewska, Penman and Mcandrew1998), generating unusual genotypes such as YY male tilapia broodstock used to produce all-male XY tilapia offspring by crossing with normal XX females (Myers et al. Reference Myers, Hershberger and Iwamoto1986). Meiotic gynogenetic silver barb (Puntius goniontus) are all-female, can be produced in large numbers and can be sex-reversed to generate neo-males without the need for progeny testing; they are now used in large numbers as broodstock for commercial production of all-female fry (Pongthana et al. Reference Pongthana, Penman, Baoprasertkul, Hussain, Islam, Powell and McAndrew1999). Gynogenesis was similarly used in the development of all-female turbot (Cal et al. Reference Cal, Vidal, Martinez, Alvarez-Blazquez, Gomez and Piferrer2006).

Double haploid individuals from either a mitotic gynogenetic or androgenetic background can also be used to generate clonal or isogenic lines after a second round of parthenogenesis. Apart from model species such as zebrafish (Streisinger et al. Reference Streisinger, Walker, Dower, Knauber and Singer1981), clonal lines have been produced in tilapia (Müller-Belecke & Hörstegen Schwark Reference Müller-Belecke and Hörstegen-Schwark1995; Hussain et al. Reference Hussain, Penman and McAndrew1998; Sarder et al. Reference Sarder, Penman, Myers and McAndrew1999) rainbow trout (Scheerer et al. Reference Scheerer, Thorgaard, Allendorf and Knudsen1986; Thorgaard et al. Reference Thorgaard, Scheerer, Hershberger and Myers1990; Quillet et al. Reference Quillet, Dorson, Le Guillou, Benmansour and Boudinot2007) and common carp (Bongers et al. Reference Bongers, Bovenhuis, Van Stokkom, Wiegertjes, Zandieh-Doulabi, Komen and Richter1997). These are useful for disease and vaccine studies and an important resource for whole genome sequencing.

GENE TRANSFER TECHNOLOGIES

Transgenic fish containing the human growth hormone gene (hGHg) have been produced in goldfish (Zhu et al. Reference Zhu, Li, He and Chen1985), rainbow trout (Penman et al. Reference Penman, Beeching, Penn and Maclean1990), channel catfish (Dunham et al. Reference Dunham, Eash, Askins and Townes1987) and Nile tilapia (Brem et al. Reference Brem, Brenig, Horstgen-Schwark and Winnacker1988). However, less than 0·05 integrated a copy of the construct into the host genome, and a number of other problems arose. Improved techniques resulted in growth enhancement in rainbow trout (Penman et al. Reference Penman, Beeching, Penn, Rahman, Sulaiman and Maclean1991), common carp (Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Hayat, Joyce, Gonzalez Villasenor, Lin, Dunham, Chen and Powers1990), channel catfish (Dunham et al. Reference Dunham, Ramboux, Duncan, Hayat, Chen, Lin, Gonzalez-Villasenor and Powers1992) and tilapia (Rahman & Maclean Reference Rahman and Maclean1999). The most dramatic results were with total piscine constructs using either an ocean pout antifreeze promoter (ocAFP) controlling a chinook salmon growth hormone (GH) cDNA or a sockeye salmon metallothionein (MT) promoter controlling a full-length sockeye GH gene. Transgenics showed a 5–30-fold increase in growth up to 1 year of age (Devlin et al. Reference Devlin, Yesaki, Donaldson, Du and Hew1995) and individuals successfully passed this performance onto their offspring. The same construct had similar effects when used in other salmonid species (Du et al. Reference Du, Gong, Fletcher, Shears, King, Idler and Hew1992; Devlin et al. Reference Devlin, Yesaki, Donaldson, Du and Hew1995; Devlin Reference Devlin and Houdebine1997; Cook et al. Reference Cook, McNiven, Richardson and Sutterlin2000).

Salmonids have a very positive response to GH (Dunham & Devlin Reference Dunham, Devlin, Murray, Anderson, Oberbauer and McGloughlin1998), while warm water species such as tilapia and carp, growing rapidly throughout the year, are probably not as reliant on GH regulation. Effects are also greater on wild fish than selected strains; Devlin et al. (Reference Devlin, Biagi, Yesaki, Smailus and Byatt2001) found a 17-fold improvement of transgenics over their wild sibs in rainbow trout, but only 4·4% gain with selected domestic strains.

Quite apart from the difficult issue of public acceptability and environmental risk, a range of practical constraints means that transgenic fish are unlikely to become a commercial reality in the immediate future (Mair et al. Reference Mair, Nam, Solar, Kapuscinski, Hayes, Li and Dana2007). However, functional genomic work is already identifying candidate transgenic genes in the area of improved disease resistance.

MOLECULAR TECHNIQUES

Genetic markers

Liu & Cordes (Reference Liu and Cordes2004) and Liu (Reference Liu2009) provide reviews on molecular markers in aquatic organisms. Markers are defined as Type 1 or actual genes of known function and Type 2 or anonymous DNA segments. To date, Type 2 and in particular microsatellite markers (Tautz Reference Tautz1989) have had a notable impact and large numbers of microsatellite loci (small tandem repeat DNA sequences) have been generated in salmonids, tilapia, sea bass, sea bream and carp.

Microsatellites have immediate application in defining stock parentage (Norris et al. Reference Norris, Bradley and Cunningham2000), particularly for marine species where it is difficult to develop single family rearing. Studies in mass spawning species such as sea bream (Brown et al. Reference Brown, Woolliams and McAndrew2005) and cod (Herlin et al. Reference Herlin, Delghandi, Wesmajervi, Taggart, McAndrew and Penman2008) and in manually spawned halibut (Jackson et al. Reference Jackson, Martin-Robichaud and Reith2003) have shown that parentage assignment is critical to avoid the offspring of a few individuals dominating replacement broodstocks. This technology also removes the need for physical tags, increasing potential family numbers in commercial environments and avoiding the risk of tags entering the human food chain, and can also reduce the cost of maintaining breeding nucleus backup populations.

Genetic markers have many other potential uses in managing farmed and wild stocks, for example identifying origin of escaped farm stock in Atlantic salmon, rainbow trout and Atlantic cod (Glover Reference Glover2010) and defining potential introgression of genes from farm escapes into wild populations of salmon (Skaala et al. Reference Skaala, Wennevik and Glover2006).

Genetic mapping

Genetic linkage maps (Danzmann & Gharbi Reference Danzmann, Gharbi and Liu2007) enable identification of QTL or genome sections containing genes influencing important traits. The QTL data for species such as Atlantic salmon, tilapia and common carp are steadily increasing (Korol et al. Reference Korol, Shirak, Cnaani, Hallerman and Liu2007), though most maps require further precision. However, using the large differences in recombination rate between sexes (Hayes et al. Reference Hayes, Gjuvsland and Omholt2006), it has been possible to speed up QTL identification for resistance to infectious pancreatic necrosis (IPN) and incorporate the QTL into a commercial Atlantic salmon breeding programme (Houston et al. Reference Houston, Haley, Hamilton, Guy, Tinch, Taggart, McAndrew and Bishop2008).

The majority of QTL described are for easily measured traits. Future programmes will benefit by identifying QTL or more focused MAS for traits that are more difficult to measure, e.g. those with low heritability, identifying candidates early before maturity, traits only observed in one of the sexes and a range of post-harvest traits such as flesh quality (e.g. colour, fillet conformation and adiposity; Lande & Thompson Reference Lande and Thompson1990). The use of MAS technology will increase in aquaculture, and De Santis & Jerry (Reference De-Santis and Jerry2007) have listed a number of candidate genes derived from what is known in terrestrial livestock.

Rapid developments in identifying expressed sequence tags (EST) are opening prospects for mapping Type 1 markers. For stock in different developmental stages or environments it will be possible to see which genes are expressed and how a given gene or subset of genes is affected. Mapping of ESTs is easier if a radiation hybrid (RH) mapping panel is available. The first panel was constructed in a commercial species, gilthead sea bream Sparus auratus (Senger et al. Reference Senger, Priat, Hitte, Sarropoulou, Franch, Geisler, Bargelloni, Power and Gailibert2006), and work is in progress for species such as sea bass. Type 1 markers allow comparative use of genomic approaches to help identify possible loci for less well-studied commercial species Sarropoulou et al. (Reference Sarropoulou, Nousdili, Magoulas and Kotoulas2008).

This area is developing very rapidly (Rexroad Reference Rexroad and Liud2007), with work on single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) (Liu Reference Liu2009) and bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) libraries to more densely map species (He et al. Reference He, Du, Li, Scheuring, Zhang and Liu2007). Several BACs are now available: for Atlantic salmon (Davidson, Reference Davidson and Liu2007), tilapia (Katagiri et al. Reference Katagiri, Asakawa, Minagawa, Shimixu, Hirono and Aoki2001), sea bass (Whitaker et al. Reference Whitaker, McAndrew and Taggart2006) and Pacific oyster (Crassostrea gigas; Cunningham et al. Reference Cunningham, Hikima, Jenny, Chapman, Fang, Saski, Lundqvist, Wing, Cupit, Gross, Warr and Tomkins2006). Physical mapping projects based on BAC are under way in Atlantic salmon (Ng et al. Reference Ng, Artieri, Bosdet, Chiu, Danzmann, Davidson, Ferguson, Fjell, Hoyheim, Jones, de Jong, Koop, Krzywinski, Lubieniecki, Marra, Mitchell, Mathewson, Osoegawa, Parisotto, Phillips, Rise, von Schalburg, Schein, Shin, Siddiqui, Thorsen, Wye, Yang and Zhu2005), tilapia (Katagiri et al. Reference Katagiri, Kidd, Tomasino, Davis, Wishon, Stern, Calreton, Howe and Kocher2005) and Channel catfish (Xu et al. Reference Xu, Wang, Liu, Thorsen, Kucuktas and Liu2007). New generation sequencing (NGS), particularly restriction site-associated DNA (RAD tagging; Miller et al. Reference Miller, Dunham, Amores, Cresko and Johnson2007) offers the opportunity to rapidly and cost-effectively identify and analyse thousands of SNPs and should speed up the discovery rate of QTL, particularly in species with poor genomic resources.

Functional genomics

The construction of microarray chips, containing thousands of ESTs derived from the whole animal or more focused subsets of genes specific to a tissue or a biological function, allows more specific assessment of characteristics. Work in salmonids has progressed the furthest (Rise et al. Reference Rise, von Schalburg, Cooper, Koop and Liud2007), studying gene expression for a range of traits including disease-related responses, such as for Piscirickettsia salmonis (Rise et al. Reference Rise, Jones, Brown, von Schalburg, Davidson and Koop2004), Aeromonas salmonicida (Ewart et al. Reference Ewart, Belanger, Williams, Karakach, Penny, Tsoi, Richards and Douglas2005), Ameobic gill disease (Morrison et al. Reference Morrison, Cooper, Koop, Rise, Bridle, Adams and Nowak2006), immune response to a lipopolysaccharide challenge (MacKenzie et al. Reference MacKenzie, Iliev, Liarte, Koskinen, Planas, Goetz, Molsa, Krasnov and Tort2006), live bacterial vaccines (Martin et al. Reference Martin, Blaney, Houlihan and Secombes2006), DNA vaccination (Purcell et al. Reference Purcell, Nichols, Winton, Kurath, Thorgaard, Wheeler, Hansen, Herwig and Park2006) and Gyrodactylus species (Fast et al. Reference Fast, Ross, Muise and Johnson2006; Lindenstrom et al. Reference Lindenstrom, Sigh, Dalgaard and Buchmann2006). Other traits include response to growth in transgenic salmon (Rise et al. Reference Rise, von Schalburg, Cooper, Koop and Liud2007) and stress associated with handling (Krasnov et al. Reference Krasnov, Koskinen, Pehkonen, Rexroad, Afanasyev and Molsa2005), temperature (Vornanen et al. Reference Vornanen, Hassinen, Koskinen and Krasnov2005) and highly unsaturated fatty acid lipid metabolism (Taggart et al. Reference Taggart, Bron, Martin, Seear, Høyheim, Talbot, Carmichael, Villeneuve, Sweeney, Houlihan, Secombes, Tocher and Teale2008).

With large numbers of genes being monitored for expression under a range of different conditions, it is likely that integrating QTL mapping with global gene expression may well identify patterns correlating with differences in key traits (Haley & de Koning Reference Haley and de Koning2006).

THE POTENTIAL FOR ENGINEERING PLANT SUBSTRATES FOR OMEGA-3 STOCKS IN FISH FEEDS

A further area of genetic exploration in aquaculture is that of providing feeding sources, particularly to replace or supplement high-quality inputs currently derived from fishmeal and oil, increasingly seen as a limitation for future growth in aquaculture production. Sourcing of key components, particularly omega-3 fatty acids in plant substrates, could offer great advantages of supply and cost. The reproductive tissues of higher plants store significant amounts of neutral lipids (predominantly as triacylglycerols), providing a convenient and renewable source of useful fatty acids. Over 400 different fatty acids have been identified in seed oils although, remarkably, none have been found to contain the very long chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (LC-PUFAs), particularly eicosapentaneoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA).

Thus, there exists the possibility of genetically engineering plants to modify seed oil composition to include omega-3 PUFAs. Its feasibility has already been demonstrated with the ‘stacking’ of multiple genes in a single transgenic plant, and also the identification from marine microbes of the biosynthetic genes which direct the synthesis of EPA and DHA. As outlined below, considerable progress has been made in the last 5 years towards producing an alternative, sustainable source of fish oils from transgenic plants.

The first landmark ‘proof of concept’ demonstration of the accumulation of the C20 omega-3 LC-PUFA EPA in transgenic plants was achieved in 2004 by several groups, using genes from PUFA-synthesizing micro-organisms to direct the synthesis of this fatty acid in either leaves or seeds of different plant species (Arabidopsis, Qi et al. Reference Qi, Fraser, Mugford, Dobson, Sayanova, Butler, Napier, Stobart and Lazarus2004; tobacco and linseed, Abbadi et al. Reference Abbadi, Domergue, Bauer, Napier, Welti, Zähringer, Cirpus and Heinz2004). Both studies reported low but significant levels of EPA (0·01–0·03 of total fatty acids). Building on these foundations, further work was carried out in Brassica juncea (Indian mustard) in which up to nine algal and moss genes were expressed, resulting in the accumulation of 0·15 EPA but <0·01 DHA in seed oils (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Truksa, Datla, Vrinten, Bauer, Zank, Cirpus, Heinz and Qiu2005). Similar attempts to produce DHA in transgenic Arabidopsis seeds resulted in <0·01 DHA in total fatty acids (Robert et al. Reference Robert, Singh, Zhou, Petrie, Blackburn, Mansour, Nichols, Liu and Green2005), whereas further fine-tuning resulted in accumulation of up to 0·25 EPAs in Brassica carinata (Cheng et al. Reference Cheng, Wu, Vrinten, Falk, Bauer and Qiu2010). However, while transgenic accumulation of the C20 omega-3 PUFA EPA is achievable at levels similar or greater to those found in marine organisms (fish, algae or diatoms), the synthesis of DHA is still a considerable challenge, with no current demonstration of accumulation above 0·03–0·04 (Venegas-Calerón et al. Reference Venegas-Calerón, Sayanova and Napier2010). However, since DHA is a direct metabolite of EPA, it might be expected that the recently reported high levels of EPA will serve as a superior platform with which to increase transgenic DHA levels.

In addition to EPA and DHA, efforts have been focused at transgenic production of the omega-3 surrogate stearidonic acid (SDA): SDA is not a bona fide omega-3 LC-PUFA, being only 18 carbons long, but has been demonstrated to undergo in vivo conversion to EPA in animals and could serve as an alternative source of fish oils. Only a very few plant species accumulate SDA, such as Echium, a non-agronomically adapted and low-yielding species. Transgenic soybeans accumulating significant SDA (up to 0·29 of total seed fatty acids) have been reported (Eckert et al. Reference Eckert, La Vallee, Schweiger, Kinney, Cahoon and Clemente2006), and has transgenic linseed enriched with up to 0·13 SDA (Ruiz-Lopez et al. Reference Ruiz-López, Haslam, Venegas-Calerón, Larson, Graham, Napier and Sayanova2009). Interestingly, although SDA levels in transgenic linseed were lower than that reported for soybean, the C18 omega-3 content was superior, as was the absence of the omega-6 fatty acid dihomo-gamma-linoleic acid (GLA; Ruiz-Lopez et al. Reference Ruiz-López, Haslam, Venegas-Calerón, Larson, Graham, Napier and Sayanova2009). Stearidonic acid has been reported to be effective as a fish oil replacement in aquaculture, though this has been disputed.

Collectively, these data confirm the promise of transgenic plants as sources of omega-3 LC-PUFAs. However, while levels of EPA (and SDA) achieved are equivalent to marine sources, DHA still represents a challenge (most likely due to its more complicated biosynthetic pathway and possibly also its reduced oxidative stability). However, given recent progress in elevating EPA it seems likely that higher DHA levels will be achievable, most likely some 0·05–0·10 of total seed oil. Such levels, especially in conjunction with moderate (0·10–0·15) levels of EPA would represent a very significant and useful source of omega-3 LC-PUFAs for aquaculture. Alternatively, an EPA-containing plant oil (lacking DHA) could provide a convenient feedstock, particularly as such material has already been produced. It will also be important to evaluate the performance of different farmed fish species when provided with these novel sources of omega-3 LC-PUFAs.

For applications in aquaculture, several factors need to be highlighted. Firstly, these oils should be considered as ‘enhanced’ with omega-3 LC-PUFAs, rather than a direct replacement, as plant oils contain significant oleic, linoleic and linolenic acids not usually found in marine oils. Thus, they might require blending to ensure optimal composition. Cultivation and use of genetically modified (GM)-derived products are also widely regulated and positive consumer responses would also need to be assured. Another consideration is the volume of GM crops to be grown – aquaculture demands could require considerable area just to provide sufficient omega-3 LC-PUFA oils to substitute for the many thousands of tonnes of fish oils consumed in the UK.

CONCLUSIONS

The current review has outlined genetic applications related to aquaculture and associated activities, ranging from immediately practical, commercially developed approaches already delivering tangible improvements to emerging techniques which will inform potential for a range of stock, environmental and husbandry interactions. There is substantial scope for using existing practical techniques; widespread adoption of broodstock management and improvement programmes would have significant impacts on sector performance, and routine application of genetic principles to hatchery-based fishery stocking programmes, and to defining and managing the aquaculture impact on biodiversity would bring about important resource and environmental gains. With a mix of strategies based on the more experimental techniques, and with more quantitative rigour the costs and benefits to the sector and to the wider environment and resource base can be better defined.

While the application of GM technologies to stocks themselves remains highly controversial, other areas may have more immediate potential. The possibility of using transgenic plants to synthesize omega-3 LC-PUFAs is within sight of providing a terrestrial feedstock unconstrained by current concerns for marine sources (Napier & Graham Reference Napier and Graham2010). With suitable controls and consumer trust, genetically modified oilseed crops could become more widely grown, providing further potential for a wide range of aquaculture production.

References

REFERENCES

Abbadi, A., Domergue, F., Bauer, J., Napier, J. A., Welti, R., Zähringer, U., Cirpus, P. & Heinz, E. (2004). Biosynthesis of very-long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in transgenic oilseeds: constraints on their accumulation. Plant Cell 16, 27342748.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Acosta, B. O. & Gupta, M. V. (2010). The genetic improvement of farmed tilapias project: impact and lessons learned. In Success Stories in Asian Aquaculture (Eds De Silva, S. S. & Davy, F. B.), pp. 149171. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartley, D. M., Rana, K. & Immink, A. J. (2001). The use of inter-specific hybrids in aquaculture and fisheries. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 10, 325337.Google Scholar
Basavaraju, Y., Mair, G. C., Mohan Kumar, H. M., Pradeep Kumar, S., Keshavappa, G. Y. & Penman, D. J. (2002). An evaluation of triploidy as a potential solution to the problem of precocious sexual maturation in common carp Cyprinus carpio, in Karnataka, India. Aquaculture 204, 407418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beveridge, M. C. M. & McAndrew, B. J. (2000). Tilapia: Biology and Exploitation. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bongers, A. B. J., Bovenhuis, H., Van Stokkom, A. C., Wiegertjes, G. F., Zandieh-Doulabi, B., Komen, J. & Richter, C. J. J. (1997). Distribution of genetic variance in gynogenetic or androgenetic families. Aquaculture 153, 225238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brem, G., Brenig, B., Horstgen-Schwark, G. & Winnacker, E. L. (1988). Gene transfer in tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Aquaculture 68, 209219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. C., Woolliams, J. A. & McAndrew, B. J. (2005). Factors influencing effective population size in commercial populations of gilthead seabream, Sparus aurata. Aquaculture 247, 219225.Google Scholar
Bye, V. J. & Lincoln, R. F. (1986). Commercial methods for the control of sexual maturation in rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri R.). Aquaculture 57, 299309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cal, R. M., Vidal, S., Martinez, P., Alvarez-Blazquez, B., Gomez, C. & Piferrer, F. (2006). Growth and gonadal development of gynogenetic diploid Scophthalmus maximus. Journal of Fish Biology, 68, 401413.Google Scholar
Cheng, B., Wu, G., Vrinten, P., Falk, K., Bauer, J. & Qiu, X. (2010). Towards the production of high levels of eicosapentaenoic acid in transgenic plants: the effects of different host species, genes and promoters. Transgenic Research 19, 221229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cook, J. T., McNiven, M. A., Richardson, G. F. & Sutterlin, A. M. (2000). Growth rate, body composition and feed digestibility/conversion of growth enhanced transgenic Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Aquaculture 188, 1532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, C., Hikima, J. I., Jenny, M. J., Chapman, R. W., Fang, G. C., Saski, C., Lundqvist, M. L., Wing, R. A., Cupit, P. M., Gross, P. S., Warr, G. W. & Tomkins, J. P. (2006). New resources for marine genomics: Bacterial artificial chromosome libraries for the eastern and pacific oysters (Crassostrea virginica and C. gigas). Marine Biotechnology 8, 521533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Danzmann, R. G. & Gharbi, K. (2007). Linkage mapping in aquaculture species. In Aquaculture Genome Technologies (Ed. Liu, Z. J.), pp. 139167. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Davidson, W. S. (2007). Bacterial Artificial Chromosome Libraries and BAC based physical mapping of aquaculture genomes. In Aquaculture Genome Technologies (Ed. Liu, Z. J.), pp. 245259. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
De-Santis, C. & Jerry, D. R. (2007). Candidate growth genes in finfish – where should we be looking? Aquaculture 272, 2238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devlin, R. H. (1997). Transgenic salmonids. In Transgenic Animals: Generation and Use (Ed. Houdebine, L. M.), pp. 105117. Amsterdam, The Netherlands Harwood Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Devlin, R. H., Biagi, C. A., Yesaki, T. Y., Smailus, D. E. & Byatt, J. C. (2001). Growth of domesticated transgenic fish. Nature 409, 781782.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devlin, R. H., Yesaki, T. Y., Donaldson, E. M., Du, S.-J. & Hew, C. L. (1995). Production of germline transgenic Pacific salmonids with dramatically increased growth performance. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52, 13761384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, S. J., Gong, Z., Fletcher, G. L., Shears, M. A., King, M. J., Idler, D. R. & Hew, C. L. (1992). Growth enhancement in transgenic Atlantic salmon by the use of an ‘all fish’ chimeric growth hormone gene construct. Nature Biotechnology 10, 176181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunham, R. A. (2004). Aquaculture and Fisheries Biotechnology: Genetic Approaches. Wallingford, UK: CABI.Google Scholar
Dunham, R. A. & Devlin, R. (1998). Comparison of traditional breeding and transgenesis in farmed fish with implications for growth enhancement and fitness. In Transgenic Animals in Agriculture (Ed. Murray, J. D., Anderson, G. B., Oberbauer, A. M. & McGloughlin, M. M.), pp. 209229. Wallingford UK: CABI.Google Scholar
Dunham, R. A., Eash, J., Askins, J. & Townes, T. M. (1987). Transfer of metallothionein-human growth hormone fusion gene into channel catfish. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116, 8791.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunham, R. A., Ramboux, A. C., Duncan, P. L., Hayat, M., Chen, T. T., Lin, C. M.Gonzalez-Villasenor, L. I. & Powers, D. A. (1992). Transfer, expression and inheritance of salmonid growth hormone in channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus, and effects on performance traits. Molecular Marine Biology and Biotechnology 1, 380389.Google ScholarPubMed
Eckert, H., La Vallee, B., Schweiger, B. J., Kinney, A. J., Cahoon, E. B. & Clemente, T. (2006). Co-expression of the borage Delta 6 desaturase and the Arabidopsis Delta 15 desaturase results in high accumulation of stearidonic acid in the seeds of transgenic soybean. Planta 224, 10501057.Google Scholar
Ewart, K. V., Belanger, J. C., Williams, J., Karakach, T., Penny, S., Tsoi, S. C. M., Richards, R. C. & Douglas, S. E. (2005). Identification of genes differentially expressed in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in response to infection by Aeromonas salmonicida using cDNA microarray technology. Developmental and Comparative Immunology 29, 333347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAO (2009). Fisheries Statistics – Aquaculture Production. Available online at http://www.fao.org/fi/statist/FISOFT/FISHPLUS.asp (verified 15 October 2010).Google Scholar
Fast, M. D., Ross, N. W., Muise, D. M. & Johnson, S. C. (2006). Differential Gene Expression in Atlantic Salmon infected with Lepeophtheirus salmonis. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 18, 116127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gall, G. A. E. & Huang, N. (1988). Heritability and selection schemes for rainbow trout: Female reproductive performance. Aquaculture 73, 5766.Google Scholar
GenoMar. (2008). Trapia: Breeding Nucleus. Available online at: http://www.genomar.no/?did=9078117 (verified 15 October 2010).Google Scholar
Gjedrem, T. (1992). Breeding plans for rainbow trout. Aquaculture 100, 7383.Google Scholar
Gjedrem, T. (2005). Selection and Breeding Programs in Aquaculture. Berlin: Springer. ISBN-10 1-4020-3341-9. 364p.Google Scholar
Gjoen, H. M. & Bentsen, H. B. (1997). Past, present and future of genetic improvement in salmon aquaculture. ICES Journal of Marine Science 54, 10091014.Google Scholar
Glover, K. A. (2010). Forensic identification of fish farm escapees: the Norwegian experience. Aquaculture Environment Interactions 1, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, X., DeBrosse, G. A. & Allen, S. K. Jr. (1996). All triploid Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas Thunberg) produced by mating tetraploids and diploids. Aquaculture 142, 149161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haley, C. & de Koning, D. J. (2006). Genetical genomics in livestock: potentials and pitfalls. Animal Genetics 37, 1012.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. J., Gjuvsland, A. & Omholt, S. (2006). Power of QTL mapping experiments in commercial Atlantic salmon populations, exploiting linkage and linkage disequilibrium and effect of limited recombination in males. Heredity 97, 1926.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
He, L., Du, C., Li, Y., Scheuring, C. & Zhang, H-B. (2007). Construction of large-insert Bacterial Clone Libraries and their applications. In Aquaculture Genome Technologies (Ed. Liu, L. J.), pp. 215244. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henryon, M., Jokumsen, A., Berg, P., Lund, I., Pedersen, P. B., Olesen, N. J. & Slierendrecht, W. J. (2002). Genetic variation for growth rate, feed conversion efficiency, and disease resistance exists within a farmed population of rainbow trout. Aquaculture 209, 5976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herlin, M., Delghandi, M., Wesmajervi, M., Taggart, J. B., McAndrew, B. J. & Penman, D. J. (2008). Analysis of the parental contribution to a group of fry from a single day of spawning from a commercial Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) breeding tank. Aquaculture 274, 218224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honglang, H. (2007). Freshwater fish seed resources in China. In Assessment of Freshwater Fish Seed Resources for Sustainable Aquaculture (Ed.Bondad-Reantaso, M. G.), pp. 185199. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 501. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Houston, R. D., Haley, C. S., Hamilton, A., Guy, D. R., Tinch, A. E., Taggart, J. B., McAndrew, B. J. & Bishop, S. C. (2008). Major quantitative trait loci affect resistance to infectious pancreatic necrosis in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Genetics 178, 11091115.Google Scholar
Hulata, G., Wohlfarth, G. W., Karplus, I., Schroeder, G. L., Harpaz, S., Halevy, A., Rothbard, S., Cohen, S., Israel, I. & Kavessa, M. (1993). Evaluation of Oreochromis niloticus×O. arueus hybrid progeny of different geographical isolates, reared under varying management regimes. Aquaculture 115, 253271.Google Scholar
Hussain, M. G., Penman, D. J. & McAndrew, B. J. (1998). Production of heterozygous and homozygous clones in Nile tilapia. Aquaculture International 6, 197205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, T. R., Martin-Robichaud, D. J. & Reith, M. E., (2003). Application of DNA markers to the management of Atlantic halibut (Hippoglossus hippoglossus) broodstock. Aquaculture 220, 245259.Google Scholar
Katagiri, T., Asakawa, S., Minagawa, S., Shimixu, N., Hirono, I. & Aoki, T. (2001). Construction and characterization of BAC libraries for three fish species; rainbow trout, carp and tilapia. Animal Genetics 32, 200204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katagiri, T., Kidd, C., Tomasino, E., Davis, J. T.Wishon, C., Stern, J. E., Calreton, K. L., Howe, A. E. & Kocher, T. D. (2005). A BAC based physical map of the Nile tilapia genome BMC Genomics 6, doi:10.1186/1471-2164-6-89.Google Scholar
Kause, A., Ritola, O., Paananen, T., Mäntysaari, E. & Eskelinen, U. (2003). Selection against early maturity in large rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss: the quantitative genetics of sexual dimorphism and genotype-by-environment interactions. Aquaculture 228, 5368.Google Scholar
Kirpichnikov, V. S. (1981). Genetic Bases of Fish Selection. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Kocher, T. D.Lee, W-J., Sobolewska, H., Penman, D. J. & Mcandrew, B. J. (1998). A genetic linkage map of a cichlid fish, the tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Genetics 148, 12251232.Google Scholar
Komen, H. & Thorgaard, G. H. (2007). Androgenesis, gynogenesis and the production of clones in fishes: a review. Aquaculture 269, 150173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korol, A.Shirak, A., Cnaani, A. & Hallerman, E. M. (2007). Detection and analysis of quantitative trait loci (QTL) for economic traits in Aquatic species. In Aquaculture Genome Technologies (Ed. Liu, L. J.), pp. 169187. Oxford, UK:Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozfkay, J. R., Dillon, J. C. & Schill, D. J. (2006). Routine use of sterile fish in salmonid sport fisheries: are we there yet? Fisheries 31, 392401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasnov, A., Koskinen, H., Pehkonen, P., Rexroad, C. E. III, Afanasyev, S. & Molsa, H. (2005). Gene expression in the brain and kidney of rainbow trout in response to handling stress. BMC Genomics 6, 3. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-6-3.Google Scholar
Lande, R. & Thompson, R. (1990). Efficiency of marker assisted selection in improvement of quantitative traits. Genetics 124, 743756.Google Scholar
Lindenstrom, T., Sigh, J., Dalgaard, M. B. & Buchmann, K. (2006). Skin expression of IL-1 beta in East Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., highly susceptible to Gyrodactylus salaris infection is enhanced compared to a low susceptibility Baltic stock. Journal of Fish Diseases 29, 123128.Google Scholar
Liu, Z. J. (2009). Aquaculture Genome Technologies. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Liu, Z. J. & Cordes, J. (2004). DNA marker technology and their applications in aquaculture genetics. Aquaculture 238, 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, G. C., Nam, Y. K. & Solar, I. I. (2007). Risk management: Reducing risk through confinement of transgenic fish. In Environmental Risk Assessment of Genetically Modified Organisms. Vol. 3. Methodologies for Transgenic Fish (Eds Kapuscinski, A.R.Hayes, K. R., Li, S. & Dana, G.), pp. 209238. Wallingford, UK: CABI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, S., Iliev, D., Liarte, C., Koskinen, H., Planas, J. V., Goetz, F. W., Molsa, H.Krasnov, A. & Tort, L. (2006). Transcriptional analysis of LPS-stimulated activation of trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) monocyte/macrophage cells in primary culture treated with cortisol. Molecular Immunology 43, 13401348.Google Scholar
Martin, S. A. M., Blaney, S. C., Houlihan, D. F. & Secombes, C. J. (2006). Transcriptome response following administration of a live bacterial vaccine in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Molecular Immunology 43, 19001911.Google Scholar
Miller, M. R., Dunham, J. P., Amores, A., Cresko, W. A. & Johnson, E. A. (2007). Rapid and cost-effective polymorphism identification and genotyping using restriction site associated DNA (RAD) markers. Genome Research 17, 240248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moen, T., Baranski, M., Sonesson, A. K. & Kjøglum, S. (2009). Confirmation and fine-mapping of a major QTL for resistance to infectious pancreatic necrosis in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar): population-level associations between markers and trait. BMC Genomics 10, 368. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-10-368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, R. N., Cooper, G. A., Koop, B. F., Rise, M. L., Bridle, A. R., Adams, M. B. & Nowak, B. F. (2006). Transcriptome profiling of the gills of amoebic gill disease (AGD)-affected Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar): a role for the tumor suppressor protein p52 in AGD – pathogenesis? Physiological Genomics 26, 1534.Google Scholar
Müller-Belecke, A. & Hörstegen-Schwark, G. (1995). Sex determination in tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) sex ratios in homozygous gynogenetic progeny and their offspring. Aquaculture 137, 5765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, J. M., Hershberger, W. K. & Iwamoto, R. N. (1986). The induction of tetraploidy in salmonids. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 17, 17.Google Scholar
Napier, J. A. & Graham, I. A. (2010). Tailoring plant lipid composition: designer oilseeds come of age. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 13, 330337.Google Scholar
Ng, S. H., Artieri, C. G., Bosdet, I. E., Chiu, R., Danzmann, R. G., Davidson, W. S., Ferguson, M. M., Fjell, C. D., Hoyheim, B., Jones, S. J., de Jong, P. J., Koop, B. F., Krzywinski, M. I., Lubieniecki, K., Marra, M. A., Mitchell, L. A., Mathewson, C., Osoegawa, K., Parisotto, S. E., Phillips, R. B., Rise, M. L., von Schalburg, K. R., Schein, J. E., Shin, H., Siddiqui, A., Thorsen, J., Wye, N., Yang, G. & Zhu, B. (2005). A physical map of the genome of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Genomics 86, 396404.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norris, A. T., Bradley, D. G. & Cunningham, E. P. (2000). Parentage and relatedness determination in farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) using microsatellite markers. Aquaculture 182, 7383.Google Scholar
Penman, D. J., Beeching, A. J., Penn, S. & Maclean, N. (1990). Factors affecting survival and integration following microinjection of novel DNA into rainbow trout eggs. Aquaculture 85, 3550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penman, D. J., Beeching, A. J., Penn, S., Rahman, A., Sulaiman, Z. & Maclean, N. (1991). Patterns of transgene inheritance in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Molecular Reproduction and Development 30, 201206.Google Scholar
Penman, D. J., Gupta, M. V. & Dey, M. M. (2005). (eds). Carp Genetic Resources for Aquaculture in Asia. WorldFish Center Technical Report 65. Penang, Malaysia: WorldFish Center.Google Scholar
Pongthana, N., Penman, D. J., Baoprasertkul, P., Hussain, M. G., Islam, M. S., Powell, S. F. & McAndrew, B. J. (1999). Monosex female production in the silver barb (Puntius gonionotus Bleeker). Aquaculture 173, 246256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purcell, M. K., Nichols, K. M., Winton, J. R., Kurath, G., Thorgaard, G. H., Wheeler, P., Hansen, J. D., Herwig, R. P. & Park, L. K. (2006). Comprehensive gene expression profiling following DNA vaccination of rainbow trout against infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus. Molecular Immunology 43, 20892106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Qi, B., Fraser, T., Mugford, S., Dobson, G., Sayanova, O., Butler, J., Napier, J. A., Stobart, A. K. & Lazarus, C. M. (2004). Production of very long chain polyunsaturated omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids in plants. Nature Biotechnology 22, 739745.Google Scholar
Quillet, E., Dorson, M., Le Guillou, S., Benmansour, A. & Boudinot, P. (2007). Wide range of susceptibility to rhabdoviruses in homozygous clones of rainbow trout. Fish and Shellfish Immunology 22, 510519.Google Scholar
Rahman, M. A. & Maclean, N. (1999). Growth performance in transgenic tilapia containing an exogenous piscine growth hormone gene. Aquaculture 173, 333346.Google Scholar
Rexroad, C. E. (2007). Radiation hybrid mapping in aquatic species. In Aquaculture Genome Technologies (Ed. Liud, Z. J.), pp. 313322. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rise, M. L., Jones, S. R., Brown, G. D., von Schalburg, K. R., Davidson, W. S. & Koop, B. F. (2004). Microarray analyses identify molecular biomarkers of Atlantic salmon macrophage and hematopoietic kidney response to Piscirickettsia salmonis infection. Physiological Genomics 20, 2135.Google Scholar
Rise, M. L., von Schalburg, K. R., Cooper, G. A. & Koop, B. F. (2007). Salmonid DNA microarrays and other tools for functional genomics research In Aquaculture Genome Technologies (Ed. Liud, Z. J.), pp. 369411. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robert, S. S., Singh, S. P., Zhou, X-R., Petrie, J. R., Blackburn, S. I., Mansour, P. M., Nichols, P. D., Liu, Q. & Green, A. G. (2005). Metabolic engineering of Arabidopsis to produce nutritionally important DHA in seed oil. Functional Plant Biology 32, 473479.Google Scholar
Ruiz-López, N., Haslam, R. P., Venegas-Calerón, M., Larson, T. R., Graham, I. A., Napier, J. A. & Sayanova, O. (2009). The synthesis and accumulation of stearidonic acid in transgenic plants: a novel source of ‘heart-healthy’ omega-3 fatty acids. Plant Biotechnology Journal 7, 704716.Google Scholar
Rutten, M. J. M., Komen, H. & Bovenhuis, H. (2005). Longitudinal genetic analysis of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus L.) body weight using a random regression model. Aquaculture 246, 101113.Google Scholar
Sarder, M. R. I., Penman, D. J., Myers, J. M. & McAndrew, B. J. (1999). Production and propagation of fully inbred clonal lines in the Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus L.). Journal of Experimental Zoology 284, 675685.3.0.CO;2-D>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sarropoulou, E., Nousdili, D., Magoulas, A. & Kotoulas, G. (2008). Linking the genomes of nonmodel teleosts through comparative genomics. Marine Biotechnolnology 10, 227233.Google Scholar
Scheerer, P. D., Thorgaard, G. H., Allendorf, F. W. & Knudsen, K. L. (1986). Androgenetic rainbow trout produced from inbred and outbred sperm sources show similar survival. Aquaculture 57, 289298.Google Scholar
Senger, F., Priat, C., Hitte, C., Sarropoulou, E., Franch, R., Geisler, R., Bargelloni, L., Power, D. & Gailibert, F. (2006). The first radiation hybrid map of a perch like fish: the Gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata L.). Genomics 87, 793800.Google Scholar
Skaala, Ø., Wennevik, V. & Glover, K. A. (2006). Evidence of temporal genetic change in wild Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., populations affected by farm escapees. ICES Journal of Marine Science 63, 12241233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, T. I. J. (1988). Aquaculture of striped bass and its hybrids in North America. Aquaculture Magazine 14, 4049.Google Scholar
Streisinger, G., Walker, C., Dower, N., Knauber, D. & Singer, F. (1981). Production of clones of homozygous diploid zebra fish (Brachydanio rerio). Nature 291, 293296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taggart, J. B., Bron, J. E., Martin, S. A. M., Seear, P. J., Høyheim, B., Talbot, R., Carmichael, S. N., Villeneuve, L. A. N., Sweeney, G. E., Houlihan, D. F., Secombes, C. J., Tocher, D. R. & Teale, A. J. (2008). A description of the origins, design and performance of the TRAITS–SGP Atlantic salmon Salmo salar L. cDNA microarray. Journal of Fish Biology 72, 20712094.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tautz, D. (1989). Hypervariability of simple sequences as a general source for polymotphic DNA markers. Nucleic Acids Research 17, 64636471.Google Scholar
Thorgaard, G. H., Scheerer, P. D., Hershberger, W. K. & Myers, J. M. (1990). Androgenetic rainbow trout produced using sperm from tetraploid males show improved survival. Aquaculture 85, 215221.Google Scholar
Vandeputte, M. (2009). Genetic improvement of common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.). Cahiers Agricultures 18, 256261.Google Scholar
Venegas-Calerón, M., Sayanova, O. & Napier, J. A. (2010). An alternative to fish oils: metabolic engineering of oil-seed crops to produce omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids. Progress in Lipid Research 49, 108119.Google Scholar
Vornanen, M., Hassinen, M., Koskinen, H. & Krasnov, A. (2005). Steady state effects of temperature acclimation on the transcriptome of the rainbow trout heart. American Journal of Physiology: Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology 289, 11771184.Google Scholar
Watterdorf, R. J. (1986). Rapid identification of triploid grass carp with Coulter counter and channelyzer. Progressive Fish Culturist 48, 125132.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitaker, H. A., McAndrew, B. J. & Taggart, J. B. (2006). Construction and characterization of a BAC library for the European sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax. Animal Genetics 37, 526.Google Scholar
Wolters, W. R., Lilyestrom, C. G. & Craig, R. J. (1991). Growth, yield and dress-out percentage of diploid and triploid channel catfish in earthen ponds. The Progressive Fish Culturist 53, 3336.Google Scholar
Wu, G., Truksa, M., Datla, N., Vrinten, P., Bauer, J., Zank, T., Cirpus, P., Heinz, E. & Qiu, X. (2005). Stepwise engineering to produce high yields of very long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in plants. Nature Biotechnology 23, 10131017.Google Scholar
Xu, P., Wang, S., Liu, L., Thorsen, J.Kucuktas, H. & Liu, Z. J. (2007). A BAC based physical map of the channel catfish genome. Genomics 90, 380388.Google Scholar
Zhang, P. J., Hayat, M., Joyce, C., Gonzalez Villasenor, L. I., Lin, C. M., Dunham, R. A., Chen, T. T. & Powers, D. A. (1990). Gene-transfer, expression and inheritance of prsv-rainbow trout-gh cDNA in the common carp, Cyprinus carpio (Linnaeus). Molecular Reproduction and Development 25, 313.Google Scholar
Zhu, Z., Li, G., He, L. & Chen, S. (1985). Novel gene transfer into the fertilised eggs of goldfish (Carassius auratus 1758). Journal of Applied Ichthyology 1, 3133.Google Scholar