Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25667605›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary applications2015

Population genomic analyses of early-phase Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) domestication/captive breeding.

Hannu Mäkinen, Anti Vasemägi, Philip McGinnity, Tom F Cross, Craig R Primmer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolutionary applications, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Atlantic salmon (Conservation physiology · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Genomic selection signatures in farmedEvolutionary applications · 2022
    Article
  10. Domestication of farmed fishFrontiers in endocrinology · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Hannu MäkinenDivision of Genetics and Physiology, Department of Biology, University of Turku Turku, Finland.
Anti VasemägiDivision of Genetics and Physiology, Department of Biology, University of Turku Turku, Finland ; Department of Aquaculture, Estonian University of Life Sciences Tartu, Estonia.
Philip McGinnityAquaculture and Fisheries Development Centre, School of Biological, Earth, and Environmental Sciences, University College Cork Cork, Ireland ; Marine Institute, Furnace Newport, Co. Mayo, Ireland.
Tom F CrossAquaculture and Fisheries Development Centre, School of Biological, Earth, and Environmental Sciences, University College Cork Cork, Ireland.
Craig R PrimmerDivision of Genetics and Physiology, Department of Biology, University of Turku Turku, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Domestication can have adverse genetic consequences, which may reduce the fitness of individuals once released back into the wild. Many wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salarL.) populations are threatened by anthropogenic influences, and they are supplemented with captively bred fish. The Atlantic salmon is also widely used in selective breeding programs to increase the mean trait values for desired phenotypic traits. We analyzed a genomewide set of SNPs in three domesticated Atlantic salmon strains and their wild conspecifics to identify loci underlying domestication. The genetic differentiation between domesticated strains and wild populations was low (F ST < 0.03), and domesticated strains harbored similar levels of genetic diversity compared to their wild conspecifics. Only a few loci showed footprints of selection, and these loci were located in different linkage groups among the different wild population/hatchery strain comparisons. Simulated scenarios indicated that differentiation in quantitative trait loci exceeded that in neutral markers during the early phases of divergence only when the difference in the phenotypic optimum between populations was large. This study indicates that detecting selection using standard approaches in the early phases of domestication might be challenging unless selection is strong and the traits under selection show simple inheritance patterns.

Indexed as

adaptationaquaculturecaptive populationsecological geneticspopulation genetics – empirical

Identifiers

PMID25667605
PMCPMC4310584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.