Aquaculture International

, Volume 12, Issue 6, pp 593–601 | Cite as

Genetic differentiation in hatchery strains and wild white shrimp Penaeus (Litopenaeus) vannamei (Boone, 1931) from northwest Mexico

Article
Received:
Accepted:
  • 69 Downloads

Abstract

Ten enzymatic systems were analyzed to determine allozyme genetic differentiation among three hatchery strains (A, B and C) of white shrimp, Penaeus (Litopenaeus) vannamei, commonly used in shrimp farming in northwest Mexico. A wild population from northern Sinaloa was used as a reference. Fifteen loci were detected, nine of which were polymorphic (ACP-1*, ACP-2*, AKP-2*, EST-2*, EST-3*, EST-4*, EST-5*, LAP*, and LDH*). Polymorphism of A, B and C were 53, 53, and 40%. The mean observed heterozygosity per locus was 0.071, 0.093, and 0.050 without any significant difference among them or with respect to the wild population (0.056). In all samples observed heteroxygosity was smaller than expected. The mean number of alleles per locus was 1.8 in A and 1.87 in both B and C. Strain A was the only sample without rare alleles. Only EST-3* and LAP* of strain A were in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium; the other loci were in disequilibrium in all samples. High inbreeding values and heterozygote deficiencies were detected in all samples. Distribution of allelic frequencies was heterogeneous among the samples (G-test), involving all polymorphic loci and suggesting a genetic differentiation. According to Fst, a moderate genetic differentiation (7.4%) was detected among the samples. Greater differences were between strains A and C. Based on genetic distance, the samples were grouped into two pairs, B-C and A-wild. Strain A is a young strain related to the wild sample, whereas strains B and C have a different geographic origin than the wild sample.

Key words

Allozymes Genetic differentiation Gulf of California Penaeus vannamei Population genetics White shrimp 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aebersold P.B., Winans G.A., Teel D.J., Miner G.B. and Utter F.M. 1987. Manual for starch gel electrophoresis: a method for the detection of genetic variation. NOAATechnical Report NMFS 61, 19 p.Google Scholar
  2. Alcivar-Warren A., Garcia D.K., Faggart M.A. and Rich C. 1994. Evaluation of genetic diversity of Penaeus vannamei shrimp using molecular genetic techniques. USMSFP 10th Anniversary Review, GCRL. Special Publication, 1: 27–34.Google Scholar
  3. Benzie J.A.H. 2000. Population genetic structure in penaeid prawns. Aquacul. Res. 31: 95–119.Google Scholar
  4. Benzie J.A.H., Frusher S. and Ballment E. 1992. Geographical variation in allozyme frequencies of populations of Penaeus monodon (Crustacea: Decapoda), in Australia. Aust. J. Mar. Freshw. Res. 43: 715–725.Google Scholar
  5. Chakraborty R. and Leimar O. 1988. Genetic variation within a subdivided population. In: Rayman N. and Utter F. (eds) Population Genetics and Fisheries Management. University of Washington Press. Seattle, pp. 89–120.Google Scholar
  6. English L.J., Maguire G.B. and Ward R.D. 2000. Genetic variation of wild and hatchery populations of the Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas, in Australia. Aquaculture 187: 283–298.Google Scholar
  7. Garcia D.K., Faggart M.A., Rhoades L., Wyban J.A., Carr W.H., Ebert K.M., Sweeney J.L. and Alcívar-Warren A. 1994. Genetic diversity of cultured Penaeus vannamei shrimp using three molecular genetic techniques. Mol. Mar. Biol. and Biotechnol. 3: 270–280.Google Scholar
  8. Harris S.E.G., Dillion Jr., R.T., Sandifer P.A. and Lester P.J. 1990. Electrophoresis of isozymes in cultured Penaeus vannamei. Aquaculture 85: 330.Google Scholar
  9. Lewontin R.C. 1991. Twenty-five years ago in genetics: electrophoresis in the development of evolutionary genetics: milestone or millstone? Genetics 128: 657–662.Google Scholar
  10. Li C.C. and Horvitz D.G. 1953. Some methods of estimating the inbreeding coefficient. Am. J. Hum. Gen. 5: 107–117.Google Scholar
  11. Moore S.S., Whan V., Davis G.P., Byrne K., Hetzel D.J.S. and Preston N. 1999. The development and application of genetic markers for the Kuruma prawn Penaeus japonicus. Aquaculture 173: 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nei M. 1978. Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small number of individuals. Genetics 89: 583–590.Google Scholar
  13. Ramos-Paredes J. and Grijalva-Chon J.M. 2003. Allozyme genetic analysis in hatchery strains and wild blue shrimp Penaeus (Litopenaeus) stylirostris (Stimpson) from the Gulf of California. Aquacul. Res. 34: 221–234.Google Scholar
  14. Raymond M. and Rousset F. 1995. Genepop (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact test and ecumenicism. J. Heredity 86: 248–249.Google Scholar
  15. Rice W.R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistic tests. Evolution 43: 223–225.Google Scholar
  16. Rosa-Veélez J.de la, Escobar-Fernández R., Correa F. and Felix E. 1999. High Allozyme variation and genetic similarity of two populations of commercial penaeids, Penaeus brevirostris (Kingsley) and P. vannamei (Boone) from the Gulf of California. Aquacul. Res. 30: 459–463.Google Scholar
  17. Rosa-Vélez J.de la, Escobar-Fernández R., Correa F., Maqueda-Cornejo M. and Torre-Cueto J.de la 2000. Genetic structure of two commercial peneids (Penaeus califomiensis y P. stylirostris) from the Golf of California, as revealed by allozyme variation. Fish. Bull. 98: 674–683.Google Scholar
  18. Rosenberry B. 2001. World Shrimp Farming 2001. Shrimp News International. San Diego, California, USA, 292 p.Google Scholar
  19. Sbordoni V., de Matthaeis E., Cobolli-Sbordoni M., la Rosa G. and Mattoccia M. 1986. Bottleneck effects and the depression of genetic variability in hatchery stocks of Penaeus japonicus (Crustacea, Decapoda). Aquaculture 57: 239–251.Google Scholar
  20. Sbordoni V., la Rosa G., Mattoccia M., Cobolli-Sbordoni M. and de Matthaeis E. 1987. Genetic changes in seven generations of hatchery stocks of the kuruma prawn, Penaeus japonicus (Crustacea, Decapoda). Proc. World Symposium on Selection, Hybridization, and Genetic Engineering in Aquaculture, Bordeaux, France, May 27–30, 1986.Google Scholar
  21. Selander R.K., Smith M.H., Tang S.Y., Johnson W.E. and Gentry J.B. 1971. Biochemical polymorphisms and systematics in the genus Peromyscus I. Variation in the old field mouse (Peromyscus polonatus) Studies on Genetics VI. University of Texas Publications, 7103: 49–90.Google Scholar
  22. Shaklee J.B., Allendorf F.W., Morizot B.C. and Whitt G.S. 1990. Gene nomenclature for protein-coding loci in fish. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 119: 2–15.Google Scholar
  23. Shaw C.R. and Koen A.L. 1968. Starch gel zone electrophoresis of enzymes. A compilation of recipes. Biochem. Gen. 4: 297–320.Google Scholar
  24. Sugama K., Haryanti Benzie J.A.H. and Ballment E. 2002. Genetic variation and population structure of giant tiger prawn, Penaeus monodon, in Indonesia. Aquaculture 205: 37–48.Google Scholar
  25. Sunden S.P.F. and Davis S.K. 1991. Evaluation of genetic variation in a domestic population of Penaeus vannamei (Boone): a comparison with three natural populations. Aquaculture 97: 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tang K.F.J., Durand S.V., White B.P., Redman R.M., Pantoja C.R. and Lightner D.V. 2000. Postlarvae and juveniles of a selected line of Penaeus stylirostris are resistant to infectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virus infection. Aquaculture 190: 203–210.Google Scholar
  27. Workman P.L. and Niswander J.D. 1970. Population studies on Southwestern Indian Tribes. II. Local genetic differentiation in the Papago. Am. J. Hum. Gen. 22: 24–29.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Investigaciones Científicas y TecnológicasUniversidad de SonoraSonoraMéxico

Personalised recommendations