Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Use of molecular tools for research and improvement of aquaculture stocks
|Title:||Use of molecular tools for research and improvement of aquaculture stocks|
|Authors:||Hallerman, Eric M.|
|Keywords:||Genetic markers, parentage assignment, QTL detection, marker-assisted selection, gene expression profiling, genetic marking|
|LC Subject Headings:||Fish culture--Israel--Periodicals.|
|Publisher:||Israeli Journal of Aquaculture - BAMIGDEH|
|Citation:||Hallerman, E.M. (2006). Use of molecular tools for research and improvement of aquaculture stocks. The Israeli Journal of Aquaculture - Bamidgeh, 58(4), 286-296.|
|Series/Report no.:||The Israeli Journal of Aquaculture - Bamidgeh|
|Abstract:||Development of molecular genetic markers provides aquaculture with tools for a number of research and practical applications. Genetic marking of experimental groups allows their evalu- ation in the same rearing units, increasing statistical power within limited research infrastructure. Parentage can be inferred for individuals in mixed-progeny groups, quantifying the contributions of individual parents and supporting the estimation of sire and dam effects. Building upon parent- age assignment, walk-back selection entails retention of the best members of each family as broodstock for the next generation. Molecular markers can be used to detect the segregation of quantitative trait loci (QTL) and knowledge of such linkages can be used for marker-assisted selection. Gene expression profiling can identify genes affecting traits of interest, providing can- didates for QTL or functional analysis. Purposeful genetic marking can be used to identify pro- prietary stocks, marketed products, and fish out-planted or escaping into natural ecosystems. Although each application has been demonstrated, genetic markers are not routinely used in commercial aquaculture. The limited practical application can be explained by the limited devel- opment of broodstocks for most aquaculture species, the small size and limited scope of most aquaculture operations, and the costs of genetic screening.|
|Appears in Collections:||IJA Volume 58, Issue 4, 2006|
Please email email@example.com if you need this content in an ADA-compliant format.
Items in eVols are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.