Advertisement

Conservation Genetics

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 503–508 | Cite as

Introgression of peled (Coregonus peled) into European whitefish (C. lavaretus) in Poland

  • Danijela PopovićEmail author
  • Miroslaw Szczepkowski
  • Tomasz Heese
  • Piotr Weglenski
Short Communication

Abstract

Human-induced hybridization between previously allopatric species deserves special attention from conservationists. The European whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus), native fish species in Poland, hybridizes with another coregonid fish—peled (Coregonus peled) due to artificial fertilization in the hatcheries. The latter species is native to Siberian waters and was introduced into Poland in 1966. The offspring of these two species are fertile, and interspecific hybrids have been shown to be present in certain Polish lakes. In this study, we estimate the level of peled introgression into the whitefish gene pool and verify the presence of pure whitefish populations in the four Polish lakes. Genetic analysis of 12 microsatellite loci and ITS 1 (internal transcribed spacer 1) fragment sequences revealed limited introgression. Bayesian admixture analysis showed that only one lake harbored an admixed population. All six admixed individuals possessed European whitefish mtDNA haplotypes. This study is the first comprehensive investigation of whitefish genetic diversity in Poland and revealed very limited introgression of peled. Obtained results showed that pure whitefish populations are still present in Poland and represent appropriate source for supportive breeding programs.

Keywords

Whitefish Peled Admixture analysis Hybridization Introgression 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank A. Bryla for providing tissue samples. We are grateful to M. Baca and H. Pannagiotopoulou for valuable comments and advice. This work was financially supported by the Polish National Centre for Research and Development through Grant ZPB/62/72380/IT2/10 and project financing agreements POIG.02.02.00-14-024/08-00.

Supplementary material

10592_2015_786_MOESM1_ESM.docx (24 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (docx 24 kb)

References

  1. Allendorf FW, Leary RF, Spruell P, Wenburg JK (2001) The problems with hybrids: setting conservation guidelines. Trends Ecol Evol 16:613–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson EC, Thompson EA (2002) A model-based method for identifying species hybrids using multilocus genetic data. Genetics 160:1217–1229PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Demska-Zakes K, Mamcarz A (1996) Gonadal abnormalities in Coregonus p eled Gmel. × Coregonus l avaretus L. hybrids, introduced into natural waters. In: Kirchhofer A, Hefti D (eds) Conservation of endangered freshwater fish in Europe. Birkhauser Verlag, Basell, Switzerland, pp 225–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Earl DA, VonHoldt BM (2012) STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv Genet Resour 4:359–361. doi: 10.1007/s12686-011-9548-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611–2620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Heese T (2000) The Miedwie whitefish Coregonus lavaretus (L., 1758) characteristics of the filtration apparatus. Folia Univ Agric Stetin Piscaria 27:75–82Google Scholar
  7. Hall T (1999) BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. In: Nucleic acids symposium series 41: 95–98Google Scholar
  8. Jakobsson M, Rosenberg NA (2007) CLUMPP: a cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23:1801–1806CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kirtiklis L, Jankun M (2006) Chromosome analysis in coregonid individuals in the interspecific hybridization zone. J Appl Ichthyol 22:401–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Koljonen ML, Koskiniemi J, Pasanen P (1988) Electrophoretic markers for the whitefish species pair Coregonus pallasi and Coregonus peled. Aquaculture 74:217–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Luczynski M, Mamcarz A, Brzuzan P, Demska-Zakes K (1999) Introgressive Hybridization of the introduced peled (Coregonus peled) with the native whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus) threatens indigenous coregonid populations: a case study. In: Mustafa S (ed) Genetics in sustainable management. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 188–205Google Scholar
  12. Mamcarz A (1987) Introdukcja pelugi w Pojezierzu Pomorskim i w Wielkopolsce. Ogólna charakterystyka zarybionych jezior. Gosp Ryb 10:3–4Google Scholar
  13. Mamcarz A (1992) Review of 17 years of attempts to introduce Coregonus peled Gmel. into Polish lakes. Acta Acad Agric Ac Tech Olstenensis, Prot Aquarum Piscat 19:15–29Google Scholar
  14. Mickiewicz M (2014) Charakterystyka jeziorowej gospodarki zarybieniowej prowadzonej w 2013 roku. In: Mickiewicz M, Wołos A (eds) Zrównoważone korzystanie z zasobów rybackich na tle ich stanu w 2013 roku. IRS, Ołsztyn, pp 21–37Google Scholar
  15. Myslowski B, Panicz R, Sadowski J, Hofsoe P (2013) Genetic structure of the whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus) population inhabiting the Miedwie Lake, Poland, based on partial ND-1 and ITS-1 gene sequences. Aquac Int 21:739–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pritchard J, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Rogers SM, Bernatchez L (2006) The genetic basis of intrinsic and extrinsic post-zygotic reproductive isolation jointly promoting speciation in the lake whitefish species complex (Coregonus clupeaformis). J Evol Biol 19:1979–1994CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Rosenberg NA (2004) DISTRUCT: a program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol Ecol Notes 4:137–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Trella M, Fopp-Bayat D, Szczepkowski M, Polak A (2012) Charakterystyka genetyczna siei (Coregonus lavaretus, Linnaeus, 1758) z Jeziora Wisztynieckiego przy zastosowaniu markerów mikrosatelitarnego DNA. Komun Rybackie 4:11–16Google Scholar
  20. Vähä J-P, Primmer CR (2006) Efficiency of model-based Bayesian methods for detecting hybrid individuals under different hybridization scenarios and with different numbers of loci. Mol Ecol 15:63–72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Witkowski A, Kotusz JAN, Przybylski M (2009) Stopień zagrożenia słodkowodnej ichtiofauny Polski : Czerwona lista minogów i ryb—stan 2009. Chrońmy Przyr Ojcz 65:33–52Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Danijela Popović
    • 1
    Email author
  • Miroslaw Szczepkowski
    • 2
  • Tomasz Heese
    • 3
  • Piotr Weglenski
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre of New TechnologiesUniversity of WarsawWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Department of Sturgeon Fish BreedingInland Fisheries Institute in OlsztynPozezdrzePoland
  3. 3.Koszalin University of TechnologyKoszalinPoland

Personalised recommendations