Molecular Biology Reports

, Volume 45, Issue 5, pp 1523–1526 | Cite as

Microsatellite loci obtained by next generation sequencing on the sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria)

  • Adonaji Madeleine Orozco-Ruiz
  • Carolina Galván-Tirado
  • Svetlana Yu. Orlova
  • Alexei M. Orlov
  • Francisco Javier García-De León
Short Communication


Eleven microsatellite loci were developed and characterized for the sablefish, Anoplopoma fimbria. The markers were identified from sequences obtained by next generation sequencing. Thirty samples from Aleutians Islands were genotyped. The amplifications were performed with three different annealing temperature and amplification products were visualized in ABI 3500 Genetic Analyzer. No evidence for scoring errors was detected by stuttering or due large allele dropout and neither of the loci presented a high null allele frequency (> 0.2). The number means of alleles per locus was of 12.21 and mean of observed and expected heterozygosity were of 0.60 and 0.75 respectively. The sablefish represents a resource of high commercial value on the coasts of Japan, Russia, Canada and west coast of the United States and these new primers could be useful to future diversity and structure population studies.


Microsatellites Sablefish Next generation sequencing Genetic diversity 



This work was carried out thanks to the financing granted by SAGARPA-INAPESCA through the Program of Innovation, Research, Technological Development and Education of Aquatic Genetic Resources 2015. We also thank CONACYT for the fellowship granted through the National Researcher System (SNI) program to AMOR.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

No required for our submission.

Informed consent

No required for our submission.


  1. 1.
    Nelson J, Grande T, Wilson M (2016) Fishes of the world, 5th edn. Wiley, New Jersey, pp 467–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sigler M, Lowe S, Kastelle C (1997) Area and depth differences in the age-length relationship of sablefish, Anoplopoma fimbria, in Gulf of Alaska. Proceedings of the international symposium on the biology and management of sablefish. NOAA Tech Rep pp 55–63Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arkoosh MR, Dietrich JP, Rew MB et al (2018) Exploring the efficacy of vaccine techniques in juvenile sablefish, Anoplopoma fimbria. Aquac Res 49(1):205–216. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guzmán JM, Luckenbach JA, Middleton MA et al (2017) Reproductive life history of sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria) from the U.S. Washington coast. PLoS ONE. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martínez P, Figueras A (2007) Genética y Genómica en Acuicultura. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Madrid, pp 21–55Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ekblom R, Galindo J (2011) Applications of next generation sequencing in molecular ecology of non-model organisms. Heredity 107(1):1–15. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Faircloth BC (2008) MSATCOMMANDER: detection of microsatellite repeat arrays and automated, locus-specific primer design. Mol Ecol Resour 8:92–94. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Untergasser A, Cutcutache I, Koressaar T et al (2012) Primer3- new capabilities and interfaces. Nucleic Acid Res 40:e115. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd edn. Cold Spring Harbor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Excoffier L, Lischer H (2010) Arlequin suite V.3.5: a new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Mol Ecol Resour 10(3):564–567. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chapuis MP, Estoup A (2007) Microsatellite null alleles and estimation of population differentiation. Mol Biol Evol 24:621–631. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Willis DPM, Shipley P (2004) MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol Notes 4:535–538. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223–225. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ruzante D, Taggart C, Cook D (1996) Spatial and temporal variation in the genetic composition of larval cod (Gadus morhua) aggregation: cohort contribution and genetic stability. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 53(12):2695–2705. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dannewitz J, Maes G, Johansson L, Wickstrom H, Volckaert M, Jarvi T (2005) Panmixia in the European eel: a matter of time. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 272(1568):1129–1137. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tripp-Valdéz M, García-De León FJ, Espinosa-Pérez H, Ruiz-Campos G (2012) Population structure of sablefish Anoplopoma fimbria using genetic variability and geometric morphometric analysis. J Appl Ichthyol 28:516–523. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Valenzuela-Quiñonez F, De-Anda-Montañez J, Gilbert-Horvath E, Garza JC, García-De León FJ (2016) Panmixia in a critically endangered fish: the totoaba (Totoaba macdonaldi) in the Gulf of California. J Hered 107(6):496–503. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratorio de Genética para la ConservaciónCentro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste (CIBNOR)La PazMexico
  2. 2.Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO)MoscowRussia
  3. 3.Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IPEE)MoscowRussia
  4. 4.Dagestan State University (DSU)MakhachkalaRussia
  5. 5.Caspian Institute of Biological ResourcesDagestan Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences (CIBR)MakhachkalaRussia
  6. 6.Tosk State University (TSU)TomskRussia

Personalised recommendations