Comparative genetic analysis of natural and farmed populations of pike-perch (Sander lucioperca)

Abstract

Pikeperch (Sander lucioperca) is a native fish species in the European and Asian basin, representing high natural and economical value. However, our information on the genetic background and diversity of European populations is still limited, despite of that the production and the number of bread stocks has increased significantly in the last decade. Our aim was to develop new useable species-specific microsatellites and compare genetic diversity of ten pikeperch population from the Danube drainage basin. Thirty-four novel species-specific DNA markers were isolated and seven polymorphic microsatellite markers were selected for the population genetic analysis. The results indicated strong anthropogenic effects among the populations. The F ST estimated by the method of Weir and Cockerham (1984) was 0.214, showing moderate genetic difference among the populations. The STRUCTURE analysis and the neighbourjoining dendrogram are showing the same result: the ten examined populations aggregate six genetically distinct units. Significant lack of heterozygosity was detected in most of the populations. Presumably, it is indicating the effects of human activities and such as vigorous stocking of natural waters. In addition, the effect was proved that fish stocks involved in pond culture and RAS rearing do not necessarily originated from the geographically closest natural populations.

Genetic consequences of pond production of a pikeperch (Sander luciopercaL.) stock with natural origin: the effects of changed selection pressure and reduced population size

“…The mean number of alleles and the level of heterozygosity (He) were the second highest in the Hungarian farm population (Na = 7.55; He = 0.71) which exceeded the value of the wild population (Na = 6.00; He = 0.67). Kánainé Sipos et al (2019) estimated the genetic diversity of 10 pikeperch populations in the Danube basin (including Balaton and Attala populations) using a different microsatellite set. The genetic diversity of the two populations was moderate (Ar = 3.49 and 3.50 He = 0.46 and 0.52 in the Balaton and Attala population, respectively) compared to the other populations (Ar = 2.48-3.97 He = 0.48-0.59), but was lower than in the present study.…”

“…The basis of this variance is the genetic diversity of the native populations. The genetic diversity of the species was described in Aral-Lake (Khurshut & Kohlmann, 2009) and the Caspian Sea (Gharibkhani et al, 2009) and in Kazak (Barmintseva et al, 2014), French (Poulet et al, 2009;Louati et al, 2016), German (Eschbach et al, 2014), Fennoscandian (Björklund, Aho & Larsson, 2007;Säisä et al, 2010;Salminen et al, 2012), Russian (Kusishchin et al, 2018) and Hungarian (Kánainé Sipos et al, 2019) populations.…”

Assessing Genetic Variation in Wild and Domesticated Pikeperch Populations: Implications for Conservation and Fish Farming

“…Wild populations analyzed in this study show moderate levels of genetic diversity for microsatellite loci (average Ar:3.8 and uH E :0.58) close to values previously referred for other wild populations of pikeperch in Europe. Kánainé Sipos et al [15], for example, reported values of Ar ranging 3.5-4.0 and H E ranging 0.46-0.59 in three natural water populations from the Danube catchment area. Säisä et al [11] compared three coastal and five freshwater populations of pikeperch in the northern part of the Baltic Sea drainage basin and reported average values of H E 0.34 (for coastal samples) and 0.42 (for the lake samples) and allelic richness of 3.6 (coastal) and 4.6 (lake samples).…”

“…In the studied areas where the species has been introduced (i.e., south of France and west of Germany), populations display an unexpected high genetic diversity (i.e., similar to native areas; [3,7]), although it would have been lower due to founder effects and genetic bottleneck often happening during species introduction [14]. This is most likely a consequence of significant gene flow between allopatric populations through individuals' dispersion or human-made stocking [3,7] as observed in Northern European populations [8,15]. Despite these previous studies, the genetic structure and diversity of pikeperch populations over the species distribution range remain for the most part unknown.…”

“…Despite these previous studies, the genetic structure and diversity of pikeperch populations over the species distribution range remain for the most part unknown. This lack of knowledge is even more acute for domesticated stocks (i.e., farmed fish populations) since their genetic specificity and diversity have received far less attention to date [15].…”