11/10/2013

Tilapia genetic improvement: achievements and future directions

Hans Komen & Trnh Quc Trng Animal breeding and genomics group, wageningen university

GIFT a brief history

RIA 1

1988 Base to G5

2002 G6 to G14

Bangladesh, Cte dIvoire, Egypt, Fiji Islands, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Laos, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, China, Thailand, and Viet Nam

11/10/2013

Examples of commercial strains with ancient GIFT heritage

Genomar supreme tilapia

Spring genetics

ProGift Hainan

Realized genetic gains & inbreeding

Harvest weight
Strain GIFT Base to G91) GIFT G6 to G14
2)

Avg Gain
%/gen

F
%/gen

reference
Khaw, 2008 Khaw, 2010 Thodesen, 2011 Gjerde, 2012 Bolivar and Newkirk, 2002

7 (9) 12.5 >5*

2)

1.4**) 0.37 0.8 0.53

ProGift Hainan G2 to G6 Nicanor G0-G3

2)

13.2 >5.3* 3.5 12.9

FaST G0 to G12

2)

1) Relative to unselected base (cryopreserved sperm) 2) Regression on EBV *) reduction due to decreased selection intensity in later generations **) GIFT base to G5; cf Ponzoni, 2010

11/10/2013

Is this the best you can do?

Gain (%) = i * h2 * CV Harvest weight
h2 0.41 0.24 0.16 Response Maximum R
i =2.35 2.06

(Sae Lim, 2012)

CV
40 34 25

i = 1 - 1.5

16.0 23.8 8.2 12.2 4.3 7.6

35.2 18.0 9.5

Yes, look at Livestock!

No, single trait (2 at most) No, low selection intensities (for fish)

Harvest weight and growth rate

Growth models describe growth over a range of weights and ages:

TGC = [(HW)1-b (TW)1-b / (days x T)] *100

Lb

(e.g. Dumas, 2007)

1-b =species dependent, from Length Weight relationship W Growth in length is constant over production time

Corrects for heterogeneity of variance in TW and HW, Corrects for differences in stocking weight and grow-out period Corrects for differences in rearing temperature

11/10/2013

Effects of temperature on growth of NT

25.0
FBW after 60day growth (g) SGR (%)
19.2

10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5

20.0 Mean weight (g)

14.1

7.5
7.2

10.0
6.5 6.7

10.6

7.0 6.5

6.2

5.0
5.4

6.0 5.5 5.0

0.0 22 26 30 34

Krishen Rana

Growth rate

DGC = [(HW)3 (TW)3 / days] *100

i.e. W L3

DGC can be used to predict weight at given age and temperature DGC can be used to compare performance across strains and environments
Trong, 2013

SGR (%/day)

15.0

8.0

11/10/2013

A comparison across strains and test environments

environment
Pond, G3*) Cage, G6 Pond, G6 VAC Pond River cage RAS, base () RAS, base () RAS, G6 (all)

DGC
3.23 5.05 4.67 2.20 3.11 3.85 2.29 3.00 4.46

Origin/reference
ProGIFT, Hainan; Thodesen, 2011

GIFT G13, RIA-2 Trong, 2013 Crossbred AIT/GIFT/IDRC Rutten, 2005; Unpublished results

Correlated responses to selection

Growth rate Fillet weight and fillet yield Shape

Reproduction

11/10/2013

DGC: h2 and genetic correlations between 2 environments

h2 nucleus 0.47, rg with HW: 0.94

Trait

Cage VAC 0.94 0.77

HW rg DGC rg

(Trong, Aquaculture 384-387, 119

Fillet weight and Fillet %

Fillet Weight h2
0.24 0.33 0.16 0.30

Fillet-% h2
0.12 0.25 0.06 0.170.23

G F-% reference rg HW
0.74 0.44 0.21 0.09 No reps. 0.28% units 0.3% units
Rutten, 2005 Nguyen, 2010 Gjerde, 2012 Thodesen, 2012

rg HW
0.99 0.96 0.99 -

selection for harvest weight will increase fillet yield by correlated response

11/10/2013

Correlated responses in thickness

width h2
0.25 0.58 0.20 0.23 0.27

reference
Rutten, 2005 Charo-Karisa, 2007 Nguyen, 2010 Khaw, 2012 Trong, 2013

rg HW
0.92 0.99 0.82 (?) 0.89

Effects of age and body weight on fillet yield

Thodesen, Aquaculture 366-367, 67.

11/10/2013

Shape and ellipticity

Shape and ellipticity

Blonk, Aquaculture 307, 6-10

11/10/2013

Genetic correlations with HW

Trait HW DGC 0.94 0.02 DGC EL-H 0.47 0.21 0.15 0.24 EL-H 0.08 0.04 EL-T EL-T 0.15 0.22 0.42 0.18 0.41 0.27 0.14 0.04 EH-T EH-T 0.42 0.21 0.52 0.18 0.21 0.31 0.81 0.10 0.08 0.04

Trong, Aquaculture 384-387, 119

Ellipticity and Shape

11/10/2013

Shape and ellipticity

Heavier fish are more rotund, no effect of age (200-400 days) DGC and Ellipticity: fish selected for high growth rate become more rotund / thicker

Reproductive traits: maturation

Age at first maturation is a heritable trait
(reviewed in Taranger, 2010)

In trout, selection for late maturation was successful

(Kause, 2003)

Fisheries induced mortality of larger fish cause selection for earlier maturation

TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution Vol.22 No.12

10

11/10/2013

Maturity: correlations with HW

Kronert, 1989: zero genetic correlation Longalong, 1999 (visual inspection)

Aquaculture 178:113-12

Charo-Karisa, 2007 (dissected gonads): 0.18 0.24

Reproductive traits: fecundity and fertility

In livestock, genetic correlations with production traits are often negative
Up Adult body weight Feed efficiency Carcass fat and moisture level Body weight 8, 20, 24 weeks Egg weight But also Age at first egg
Nestor, 2000; 30 generations

Down Fertility Hatchability Egg production

Marks, 1996; > 80 generations

Hatchability Egg production

11

11/10/2013

Genetic correlations with HW

NEGG 0.08 HW 0.51 0.29

RFEC 0.05 0.72 0.14 0.99 0.01

EGGW 0.05 0.48 0.41 0.74 0.50 0.25 0.51

EGGD 0.05 0.50 0.64 0.40 0.52 0.07 0.81 0.79 0.60

NEGG

RFEC

EGGW

Trong, Aquaculture 416-417, 72

Conclusions
Selection for improved harvest weight has been successful Phenotypic trends suggest considerable improvement in growth rate (DGC) Correlated response in

fillet yield small but positive shape might be considerable age at maturity probably zero relative fecundity and egg size negative....

12

11/10/2013

Future directions: the breeding goal

Future directions: the breeding goal

porsche toyota yes no yes yes no no yes

Robustness (survival) FCR Cold tolerance Disease resistance Carcass quality traits Reproductive performance Late maturation

no yes no yes yes yes no

13

11/10/2013

Reproductive performance

August 15 sept 20, 2013 Total: 108 Fams produced 26 HS-2 families 10 HS-3 families 1 HS-4 family

Group Mating is fast: 1 male to 5-10 females Reduction of generation interval by two months: + 20% gain /yr! Increase of selection intensity (less fish needed to produce fams)

Cold tolerance
h2 0.08 0.17; c2 0.33 0.10 (Charo-karisa, 2005

14

11/10/2013

Cold tolerance and acclimatization

100 90 Cumulative percent mortality 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
12 11 .5 14 13 .5 13 12 .5 11 10 .5 10 9. 5 9 8. 5 8 7. 5 7

Experiment 1 Experiment 2

Exp 1 from 13.6C to 8.6 C Exp 2 from 11.7 C to 7.5 C

Temperature ( C)

Feed efficiency....

Selection for growth (increased harvest weight) should be accompanied by evaluations on realized FCR

15

11/10/2013

Acknowledgements
Marc Rutten, Carolien Vancoillie Yonas Fessehaye Harrison Charo-Karisa Panya Sae-Lim Henk Bovenhuis

Acknowledgements
Trong and his Tilapia team, Research Institute for Aquaculture No.2 (RIA2)

16

11/10/2013

Reproductive performance
1:2 mating design: problematic, long time needed to produce HS groups (2-3 months). Group mating designs?

17