Behavior Genetics

, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 383–393 | Cite as

Assessment of Genetic Variability of Fish Personality Traits using Rainbow Trout Isogenic Lines

  • Sandie MillotEmail author
  • Samuel Péan
  • Laurent Labbé
  • Thierry Kerneis
  • Edwige Quillet
  • Mathilde Dupont-Nivet
  • Marie-Laure Bégout
Original Research


The study of inter-individual variability of personality in fish is a growing field of interest but the genetic basis of this complex trait is still poorly investigated due to the difficulty in controlling fish genetic origin and life history. When available, isogenic lines that allow performing independent tests on different individuals having identical genotype constitute a very relevant experimental material to disentangle the genetic and environmental components of behavioural individuality. We took advantage of heterozygous isogenic lines to investigate the personality in rainbow trout through the analysis of their reactions to different experimental situations. To this end, seven to ten rainbow trout isogenic lines were screened for their spatial exploratory behaviour, their flight response toward a stressor and their risk taking behaviour. Results showed that some lines seemed less sensitive to new events or environmental changes and could be defined as low responsive, while others were very sensitive and defined as high responsive. The use of isogenic lines highlighted the importance of genetic factors, in combination with life history, in the expression of personality in domesticated fish.


Personality Isogenic lines Genetic variability Risk taking Spatial exploration Oncorhynchus mykiss 



This research project has been supported by ANR ADD COSADD No 06-PADD-05. The authors are grateful to Didier Leguay and Michel Prineau for their technical assistance.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5). Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.


  1. Aragon P, Meylan S, Clobert J (2006) Dispersal status—dependent response to the social environment in the Common Lizard, Lacerta vivipara. Funct Ecol 20:900–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell AM (2005) Behavioural differences between individuals and two populations of stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). J Evol Biol 18:464–473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bell A, Stamps JA (2004) Development of behavioural differences between individuals and populations of sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Anim Behav 68:1339–1348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berejikian BA (1995) The effects of hatchery and wild ancestry and experience on the relative ability of steelhead trout fry (Oncorhynchus mykiss) to avoid a benthic predator. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 52:2476–2482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boissy A, Bouissou MF (1995) Assessment of individual differences in behavioural reactions of heifers exposed to various fear-eliciting situations. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 46:17–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boujard T, Labbe L, Auperin B (2002) Feeding behaviour, energy expenditure and growth of rainbow trout in relation to stocking density and food accessibility. Aquac Res 33:1233–1242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown GE, Smith RJF (1997) Conspecific skin extracts elicit antipredator responses in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Can J Zool 75:1916–1922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cote J, Fogarty S, Weinersmith K, Brodin T, Sih A (2010) Personality traits and dispersal tendency in the invasive mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis). Proc R Soc B: Biol Sci 277:1571–1579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dagnélie P (1975) Théorie et méthodes statistiques, applications agronomiques, vol 2. Presses Agronomiques de Gembloux, GemblouxGoogle Scholar
  10. Dingemanse NJ, Kazem AJN, Réale D, Wright J (2010) Behavioural reaction norms: animal personality meets individual plasticity. Trends Ecol Evol 25:81–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Drangsholt TMK, Damsgård B, Olesen I (2014) Quantitative genetics of behavioral responsiveness in Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.). Aquaculture 420–421:282–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drew RE, Schwabl H, Wheeler PA, Thorgaard GH (2007) of QTL influencing cortisol levels in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Aquaculture 272S1:S183–S194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feldker DEM, Datson NA, Veenema AH, Meulmeester E, De Kloet ER, Vreugdenhil E (2003) Serial analysis of gene expression predicts structural differences in hippocampus of long attack latency and short attack latency mice. Eur J Neurosci 17:379–387PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fevolden SE, Røed KH (1993) Cortisol and immune characteristics in rainbow trout (Onchorhynchus mykiss) selected for high or low tolerance to stress. J Fish Biol 43:919–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fevolden SE, Refstie T, Røed KH (1991) Selection for high and low cortisol stress response in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) selected for stress response. Aquaculture 104:19–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fevolden SE, Røed KH, Gjedrem B (1993) Genetic components of post-stress cortisol and lysozyme activity in Atlantic salmon; correlations to disease resistance. Fish Shellfish Immunol 4:507–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Giles N, Huntingford FA (1984) Predation risk and interpopulation variation in anti-predator behaviour in the three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus L. Anim Behav 32:264–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Iguchi K, Matsubara N, Hakoyama H (2001) Behavioural individuality assessed from two strains of cloned fish. Anim Behav 61:351–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnsson JI, Abrahams MV (1991) Interbreeding with domestic strain increases foraging under threat of predation in juvenile steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): an experimental study. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 48:243–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnsson JI, Petersson E, Jönsson E, Björnsson BT, Järvi T (1996) Domestication and growth hormone alter antipredator behaviour and growth patterns in juvenile brown trout, Salmo trutta. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 53:1546–1554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Koolhaas JM, Korte SM, De Boer SF, Van Der Vegt BJ, Van Reenen CG, Hopster H, De Jong IC, Ruis MAW, Blokhuis HJ (1999) Coping styles in animals: current in behavior and stress-physiology. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 23:925–935PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krause J, Hoare D, Krause S, Hemelrijk CK, Rubenstein D (2000) Leadership in fish shoals. Fish Fish 1:82–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Le Neindre P, Boivin X, Boissy A (1996) Handling of extensively kept animals. Appl Anim Behav Sci 49:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leblond C, Reebs SG (2006) Individual leadership and boldness in shoals of golden shiners (Notemigonus crysoleucas). Behaviour 143:1263–1280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lucas M, Drew R, Wheeler P, Verrell P, Thorgaard G (2004) Behavioral differences among rainbow trout clonal lines. Behav Genet 34:355–365PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Martin EP (1991) Individual and sex differences in the use of the push-up display by the sagebush lizard, Sceloporus graciosus. Anim Behav 41:403–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Millot S, Bégout ML, Person-Le Ruyet J, Breuil G, Di-Poï C, Fievet J, Pineau P, Roué M, Sévère A (2008) Feed demand behavior in sea bass juveniles: effects on individual specific growth rate variation and health (inter-individual and inter-group variation). Aquaculture 274:87–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Millot S, Bégout ML, Chatain B (2009a) Exploration behaviour and flight response toward a stimulus in three sea bass strains (Dicentrarchus labrax L.). Appl Anim Behav Sci 119:108–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Millot S, Bégout ML, Chatain B (2009b) Risk-taking behaviour variation over time in sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax: effects of day-night alterations, fish phenotypic characteristics and selection for growth. J Fish Biol 75:1733–1749PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Øverli Ø, Winberg S, Pottinger TG (2005) Behavioral and neuroendocrine correlates of selection for stress responsiveness in rainbow trout—a review. Integr Comp Biol 45:463–474PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Øverli Ø, Sørensen C, Nilsson GE (2006a) Behavioral indicators of stress-coping style in rainbow trout: do males and females react differently to novelty? Physiol Behav 87:506–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Øverli Ø, Sorensen C, Kiessling A, Pottinger TG, Gjoen HM (2006b) Selection for improved stress tolerance in rainbow trout (Onchorhynchus mykiss) leads to reduced feed waste. Aquaculture 261:776–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Øverli Ø, Sorensen C, Pulman KGT, Pottinger TG, Korzan W, Summers CH, Nilsson GE (2007) Evolutionary background for stress-coping styles: relationships between physiological, behavioral, and cognitive traits in non-mammalian vertebrates. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 31:396–412PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pickering AD (1992) Rainbow trout husbandry-management of the stress response. Aquaculture 100:125–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pickering AD (1993) Growth and stress in fish production. Aquaculture 111:51–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pottinger TG (2006) Context dependent differences in growth of two rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) lines selected for divergent stress responsiveness. Aquaculture 256:140–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pottinger TG, Carrick TR (1999) Modification of the plasma cortisol response to stress in rainbow trout by selective breeding. Gen Comp Endocrinol 116:122–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Price EO (1998) Behavioral genetics and the process of animal domestication. In: Grandin T (ed) Genetics and the behavior of domestic animals. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 41–65Google Scholar
  39. Price EO (1999) Behavioral development in animals undergoing domestication. Appl Anim Behav Sci 65:245–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Quillet E, Krieg F, Dechamp N, Hervet C, Bérard A, Le Roy P, Guyomard R, Prunet P, Pottinger TG (2014) QTL for magnitude of the plasma cortisol response to confinement in rainbow trout. Anim Genet 45(2):223–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Quillet E, Dorson M, Le Guillou S, Benmansour A, Boudinot P (2007) Wide range of susceptibility to rhabdovirues in homozygous clones of rainbow trout. Fish Shellfish Immunol 22:510–519PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Réale D, Reader SM, Sol D, McDougall PT, Dingemanse NJ (2007) Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biol Rev 82:291–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rexroad C, Vallejo R, Liu S, Palti Y, Weber G (2012) QTL affecting stress response to crowding in a rainbow trout broodstock population. BMC Genet 13:97PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rexroad C, Vallejo R, Liu S, Palti Y, Weber G (2013) Quantitative trait loci affecting response to crowding stress in an F2 generation of rainbow trout produced through phenotypic selection. Mar Biotechnol 15:613–627PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Riechert SE, Hedrick AV (1993) A test for correlations among fitness-linked behavioural traits in the spider Agelenopsis aperta. Anim Behav 46:669–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schjolden J, Backström T, Pulman KGT, Pottinger TG, Winberg S (2005) Divergence in behavioural responses to stress in two strains of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) with contrasting stress responsiveness. Horm Behav 48:537–544PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sih A, Bell A, Johnson JC (2004) Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends Ecol Evol 19:372–378PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Slater PJB (1981) Individual differences in animal behaviour. In: Perspectives in Ethology Vol. 4 (Ed. By D.L.G. Noakes, D.G. Linquist, G.S. Helfman and J.A. Ward). The Hague: W. Junk. pp.159-171Google Scholar
  49. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry. The principles and practice of statistics in biological research. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  50. Van Oers K, de Jong G, van Noordwijk AJ, Kempenaers B, Drent PJ (2005) Contribution of genetics to the study of animal personalities: a review of case studies. Behaviour 142:1185–1206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vrijenhoek RC (1994) Unisexual fish: model systems for studying ecology and evolution. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 24:71–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weber GM, Silverstein JT (2007) Evaluation of a stress response for use in a selective breeding program for improved growth and disease resistance in Rainbow trout. N Am J Aquacult 69:69–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Weber GM, Vallejo RL, Lankford SE, Silverstein JT, Welch TJ (2008) Cortisol response to a crowding stress: heritability and association with disease resistance to Yersinia ruckeri in rainbow trout. N Am J Aquacult 70:425–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wisenden BD, Chivers DP, Brown GE, Smith RJF (1995) The role of experience in risk assessment: avoidance of areas chemically labeled with fathead minnow alarm pheromone by conspecifics and heterospecifics. Ecoscience 2:116–122Google Scholar
  55. Wolf M, van Doorn GS, Weissing FJ (2008) Evolutionary emergence of responsive and unresponsive personalities. PNAS 105:15825–15830PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wright D, Butlin R, Carlborg Ö (2006) Epistatic regulation of behavioural and morphological traits in the zebrafish (Danio rerio). Behav Genet 36:914–922PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sandie Millot
    • 1
    Email author
  • Samuel Péan
    • 1
  • Laurent Labbé
    • 2
  • Thierry Kerneis
    • 2
  • Edwige Quillet
    • 3
  • Mathilde Dupont-Nivet
    • 3
  • Marie-Laure Bégout
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire Ressources HalieutiquesIfremerL’HoumeauFrance
  2. 2.INRAUE0937 PEIMA Pisciculture Expérimentale INRA des Monts d’Arrée, Le DrennecSIZUNFrance
  3. 3.INRAUMR 1313, GABI Génétique Animale et Biologie IntégrativeJouy-en-JosasFrance

Personalised recommendations