Journal of Applied Genetics

, Volume 59, Issue 1, pp 91–97 | Cite as

Genome incompatibility between rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and sea trout (Salmo trutta) and induction of the interspecies gynogenesis

  • Marcin Polonis
  • Takafumi Fujimoto
  • Stefan Dobosz
  • Tomasz Zalewski
  • Konrad OcalewiczEmail author
Animal Genetics • Original Paper


Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum) and sea trout (Salmo trutta Linnaeus, 1758) show large karyotypic differences and their hybrid offspring is not viable due to unstable karyotype and chromosome fragmentation. However, gametes from these two species were used to induce gynogenetic development. Rainbow trout eggs activated by UV-irradiated sea trout sperm were subjected to high hydrostatic pressure (HHP) shock to prevent release of the 2nd polar body (early shock) or to inhibit the first cleavage (late shock) in order to produce diploid meiotic gynogenotes and gynogenetic doubled haploids (DHs), respectively. Cytogenetic analysis proved fish that development was induced by the sea trout spermatozoa were rainbow trout. In turn, molecular examination confirmed homozygosity of the gynogenetic DHs. Presumed appearance of the recessive alleles resulted in lower survival of the gynogenetic DH larvae (~25%) when compared to survival of the heterozygous (meiotic) gynogenotes (c. 50%). Our results proved that genomic incompatibilities between studied trout species result in the hybrid unviability. However, artificial gynogenesis including activation of rainbow trout eggs with UV-irradiated sea trout spermatozoa was successfully induced. As both species are unable to cross, application of the UV-irradiated sea trout spermatozoa to activate rainbow trout development assures only maternal inheritance with no contamination by the residues of the paternal chromosomes.


Chromosome fragments Gynogenesis Heterologous sperm Hybrids High hydrostatic pressure UV radiation 



This study was supported in part by the National Science Centre (NCN) Poland project number 2014/15/BNZ9/00510 and by JSPS-PAN under the Japan-Poland Research Cooperative Program in 2015 to 2016FY. We thank Janusz Krom and Rafał Rożyński from the Department of Salmonid Research, Inland Fisheries Institute in Olsztyn, Rutki for their technical assistance during the experiment.

Author contributions

KO, TZ and SD were involved in designing and performing the experiments. TZ took care of gynogenetic and control embryos and larvae. MP made molecular analysis. TF, KO, and MP were involved in the chromosome preparation, data analysis, writing, and editing the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have any conflict of interest to declare.

Supplementary material

13353_2017_425_Fig2_ESM.gif (1.5 mb)
Fig. 1

Sex genotypes of rainbow trout parental individuals and their gynogenetic offspring examined by PCR co-amplification of sdY and 28S rDNA (positive amplification control). Lane 1 and 21: 100 bp DNA ladder (A&A Biotechnology s.c., Poland), lane 2: parental male, lanes from 3 to 6: parental females, lanes from 7 to 20 and from 22 to 26; gynogenetic rainbow trout, lane 27: negative control. sdY marker was found only in rainbow trout male while the positive control 28S rDNA was amplified in all parental and gynogenetic fish (GIF 1507 kb)

13353_2017_425_MOESM1_ESM.tif (4.9 mb)
High resolution image file (TIFF 4972 kb)


  1. Bartley DM, Rana K, Immink AJ (2000) The use of interspecific hybrids in aquaculture and fisheries. Rev Fish Biol Fish 10:325–337 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Billard R (1977) Utilisation d'un systeme tris-glycocolle pour tamponner le dilueur d'insemination pour truite. Bull Fr Piscic 264:102–112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blanc JM, Chevassus B (1982) Interspecific hybridization of salmonid fish: II. Survival and growth up to the 4th month after hatching in F1 generation hybrids. Aquaculture 29(3-4):383-387.
  4. Chourrout D (1984) Pressure-induced retention of second polar and suppression of first cleavage in rainbow trout. Production of all triploids, all tetraploids, and heterozygous and homozygous diploid gynogenesis. Aquaculture 36(1-2):111-126.
  5. Chourrout D (1986) Use of grayling sperm (Thymallus thymallus) as a marker for the production of gynogenetic rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri). Theor Appl Genet 72(5):633–636.
  6. Chourrout D, Quillet E (1982) Induced gynogenesis in the rainbow trout: sex and survival of progenies production of all-triploid populations. Theor Appl Genet 63(3):201–205. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dobosz S, Dębowska M, Krom J, Jankun M, Zalewski T, Ocalewicz K (2015) Application of the UV-irradiated homologous and heterologous sperm for activation of the rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) eggs and production of the gynogenetic stocks. Ann Anim Sci 15(4):919–928 Google Scholar
  8. Felip A, Zanuy S, Carrillo M, Piferrer F (2001) Induction of triploidy and gynogenesis in teleost fish with emphasis on marine species. Genetica 111(1-3):175–195 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Fujiwara A, Abe S, Yamaha E, Yamazaki F, Yoshida MC (1997) Uniparental chromosome elimination in the early embryogenesis of the inviable salmonid hybrids between masu salmon female and rainbow trout male. Chromosoma 106(1):44–52 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Goudie CA, Simco BA, Davis KB, Liu Q (1995) Production of gynogenetic and polyploid catfish by pressure-induced chromosome set manipulation. Aquaculture 133:185-198.
  11. Hulata G (2001) Genetic manipulations in aquaculture: a review of stock improvement by classical and modern technologies. Genetica 111(1-3):155–173 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Jagiełło K, Zalewski T, Dobosz S, Michalik O, Ocalewicz K (2017) High rate of deformed larvae among gynogenetic brown trout (Salmo Trutta n. Fario) doubled haploid. Biomed Res Int 2017–2975187.
  13. Johnson NA (2008) Hybrid incompatibility and speciation. Nature Education 1(1):20Google Scholar
  14. Kaczmarczyk D, Kaczor A (2013) New multiplex PCR assays for estimating genetic diversity in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) by polymorphism of microsatellite DNA. Environ Biotechnol 9:19–24Google Scholar
  15. Kobayashi T, Ide A, Hiasa T, Fushiki S, Ueno K (1994) Production of cloned amago salmon Oncorhynchus rhodeus. Fish Sci 60(3):275–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krisfalusi M, Wheeler PA, Thorgaard GH, Cloud JG (2000) Gonadal morphology of female diploid gynogenetic and triploid rainbow trout. J Exp Zool 286(5):505–512.<505::AID-JEZ8>3.0.CO;2-3
  17. Kurita J, Oshiro T, Takashima F, Sakaizumi M (1995) Cytogenetic studies on diploid and triploid oogenesis in interspecific hybrid fish between Oryzias latipes and O. curvinotus. J Exp Zool A: Ecol Genet Physiol 273(3):234–241. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meng Z, Liu X, Liu B, Hu P, Jia Y, Yang Z, Zhang H, Liu X, Lei J (2016) Induction of mitotic gynogenesis in turbot Scophthalmus Maximus. Aquaculture 451:429–435 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Michalik O, Dobosz S, Zalewski T, Sapota M, Ocalewicz K (2015) Induction of gynogenetic and androgenetic haploid and doubled haploid development in the brown trout (Salmo trutta, Linnaeus 1758). Reprod Domes Anim 50(2):256–262. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morisawa S, Morisawa M (1988) Induction of potential for sperm motility by bicarbonate and pH in rainbow trout and chum salmon. J Exp Biol 136(1):13–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Ocalewicz K, Babiak I, Dobosz S, Nowaczyk J, Goryczko K (2004) The stability of telomereless chromosome fragments in adult androgenetic rainbow trout. J Exp Biol 207(13):2229–2236. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Ocalewicz K, Dobosz S, Kuzminski H, Goryczko K (2009) Formation of chromosome aberrations in androgenetic rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss, Walbaum). J Fish Biol 75(9):2373–2379. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Ocalewicz K, Hliwa P, Pomianowski K, Lisboa R, Jankun M (2014) Cytogenetic and histological studies of the brook trout, Salvelinus Fontinalis (Mitchill), and the Arctic char, S. Alpinus (L.) hybrids. Aquaculture Int 22:281–288 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pandian TJ, Koteeswaran R (1998) Ploidy induction and sex control in fish. Hydrobiologia 384(1-3):167–243 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sakai C, Konno F, Nakano O, Iwai T, Lee J, NIshida-Umehara C, Kuroiwa A, Matsuda Y, Yamashita M (2007) Chromosome elimination in the interspecific hybrid medaka between Oryzias latipes and O. hubbsi. Chromosom Res 15:697–709 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Scheerer PD, Thorgaard GH (1983) Increased survival in salmonid hybrids by induced triploidy. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 40:2040–2044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yano A, Nicol B, Jouanno E, Quillet E, Fostier A, Guyomard R, Guiguen Y (2013) The sexually dimorphic on the Y-chromosome gene (sdY) is a conserved male-specific Y-chromosome sequence in many salmonids. Evol Appl 6(3):486–496. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhang H, Tan E, Suzuki Y, Hirose Y, Kinoshita S, Okano H, Kudoh J, Shimizu A, Saito K, Watabe S, Asakawa S (2014) Dramatic improvement in genome assembly achieved using doubled-haploid genomes. Sci Rep 4:e6780. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zheng L, Senda Y, Abe S (2013) Perturbation in protein expression of the sterile salmonid hybrids between female brook trout Salvelinus Fontinalis and male masu salmon Oncorhynchus Masou during early spermatogenesis. Anim Reprod Sci 138(3-4):292–304 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Plant Genetics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznan 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcin Polonis
    • 1
  • Takafumi Fujimoto
    • 2
  • Stefan Dobosz
    • 3
  • Tomasz Zalewski
    • 3
  • Konrad Ocalewicz
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Faculty of Oceanography and Geography, Department of Marine Biology and Ecology, Institute of OceanographyUniversity of GdanskGdyniaPoland
  2. 2.Faculty of Fisheries SciencesHokkaido UniversityHakodateJapan
  3. 3.Department of Salmonid ResearchInland Fisheries Institute in OlsztynŻukowoPoland

Personalised recommendations