1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0044-8486(99)00212-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microsatellite genetic variation between and within farmed and wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) populations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

25
181
5
6

Year Published

2002
2002
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 271 publications
(217 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
25
181
5
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, for example, when the mean standardised selection gradient is 1 (that is, very strong selection), the expected evolutionary response in L F for the wild 0+parr based on the August 1998 electrofishing sample would be 0.4% (that is, an evolvability of 0.4% for the WW group), whereas that for the farmed parr would be only 0.2% (Table 3). In general, we found that V A (and hence evolvability) was lower in the FF group compared with the WW group, which is in line with previous findings that genetic variation in farm salmon strains are often lower than in wild strains (Norris et al, 1999;Skaala et al, 2004). Interestingly, Solberg et al (2013b) reported reduced heritability of juvenile mass in farm-provenance Atlantic salmon, compared with progeny of wild parents, when both were reared under standard hatchery conditions with unrestricted access to food.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Thus, for example, when the mean standardised selection gradient is 1 (that is, very strong selection), the expected evolutionary response in L F for the wild 0+parr based on the August 1998 electrofishing sample would be 0.4% (that is, an evolvability of 0.4% for the WW group), whereas that for the farmed parr would be only 0.2% (Table 3). In general, we found that V A (and hence evolvability) was lower in the FF group compared with the WW group, which is in line with previous findings that genetic variation in farm salmon strains are often lower than in wild strains (Norris et al, 1999;Skaala et al, 2004). Interestingly, Solberg et al (2013b) reported reduced heritability of juvenile mass in farm-provenance Atlantic salmon, compared with progeny of wild parents, when both were reared under standard hatchery conditions with unrestricted access to food.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Overall genetic diversity may be considerably lower in farm salmon compared with wild populations (Norris et al, 1999;Skaala et al, 2004), at least when considering highly polymorphic genetic markers, because of low effective population sizes in the farm and/or strong directional selection on target traits, which can deplete genetic variation (Lynch and Walsh, 1998). A priori, therefore, one may expect that offspring produced by farm parents should exhibit reduced phenotypic variation in the wild and therefore less variable survival rates compared with wild families.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Population genetic variation For microsatellite loci, allelic diversity is probably more informative than heterozygosity to analyse possible genetic erosion in populations (Norris et al, 1999;O'Connell and Wright, 1997;Spencer et al, 2000). The twice higher allelic diversity observed in the Durance river could reflect a widely distributed (over 30 km) and probably more numerous population (maximum local density E200 fish/ha (Moullec et al, 2000)) compared with the distributions observed in the Beaume river (over 13 km, with maximum local density E80 fish/ha (Labonne, 2002)) and in the Dr么 me river (over 2 km, with an average catch of 15 individuals by fishing operation over the whole distribution, reflecting a very low density (Genoud, 2001)).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Allelic diversity reduces faster than heterozygosity during a bottleneck [17], because the effective population size is significantly reduced, and many low frequency alleles may be eliminated, or contribute little to heterozygosity. This process could severely reduce the number of alleles by eliminating rare alleles without having a significant effect on heterozygosity [18]. After the dramatic population crash in 1998, the species experienced a genetic bottleneck, which resulted in the populations exhibiting a significant heterozygosity excess.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%