Cite this paper:
WANG Xin'an, MA Aijun. Comparison of the morphometric dynamics of fast-growing and slow-growing strains of turbot Scophthalmus maximus[J]. Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 2015, 33(4): 890-894

Comparison of the morphometric dynamics of fast-growing and slow-growing strains of turbot Scophthalmus maximus

WANG Xin'an, MA Aijun
Yellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences; Key Laboratory of Sustainable Development of Marine Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture; Qingdao Key Laboratory for Marine Fish Breeding and Biotechnology, Qingdao 266071, China
The dynamics of changes in body shape of fast-growing and slow-growing strains of turbot Scophthalmus maximus, and of the differences in body shape between the two strains, were evaluated from 3 to 27 months of age. The ratios of total length/body length, body width/body length and total length/body width were used as morphometric indices. The two strains exhibited different temporal trends in total length/body length but similar trends in body width/body length and total length/body width. Generally, body width/body length of the two strains increased with time and total length/body width decreased. Thus, the bodies of both fast-growing and slow-growing strains of turbot changed from a narrow to a more rounded shape. However, the ratio total length/body length was generally lower, body width/body length was mostly higher and total length/body width was consistently lower in the fast-growing strain than in the slowgrowing strain. Correlation analysis of the three shape ratios with body weight showed that total length/body length and total length/body width were unsuitable, and that width/body length was suitable, for use as a phenotypic marker for selective breeding of turbot for growth in weight.
Key words:    Scophthalmus maximus|slow-growing strain|fast-growing strain|morphometric comparison   
Received: 2014-07-07   Revised: 2014-11-13
PDF ( KB) Free
Print this page
Add to favorites
Email this article to others
Articles by WANG Xin'an
Articles by MA Aijun
Agrawal A A. 2001. Phenotypic plasticity in the interactions and evolution of species. Science, 294 (5541): 321-326.
Atchley W R, Xu S Z, Vogl C. 1994. Developmental quantitative genetic models of evolutionary change. Development al Genetics, 15 (1): 92-103.
Atchley W R, Zhu J. 1997. Developmental quantitative genetics, conditional epigenetic variability and growth in mice. Genetics, 147 (2): 765-776.
Blanquer A, Alayse J P, Berrada-Pkhami O et al. 1992. Allozyme variation in turbot (Psetta maxima) and brill (Scophthalmus rhombus) (Osteichthyes, Pleuronectoformes, Scophthalmidae) throughout their range in Europe. Journal of Fish Biology, 41 (5): 725-736.
Cowley D E, Atchley W R. 1992. Quantitative genetic models for development, epigenetic selection, and phenotypic evolution. Evolution, 46 (2): 495-518.
Day T, Pritchard J, Schluter D. 1994. A comparison of two sticklebacks. Evolution, 48 (5): 1 723-1 734.
Ellis T, Howell B R, Hayes J. 1997. Morphological differences between wild and hatchery-reared turbot. Journal of Fish Biology, 50 (5): 1 124-1 128.
Kerschbaumer M, Postl L, Koch M et al. 2011. Morphological distinctness despite large-scale phenotypic plasticity— analysis of wild and pond-bred juveniles of allopatric populations of Tropheus moorii. Naturwissenschaften, 98 (2): 125-134.
Khamis A, Ismail Z, Horan K et al. 2005. Nonlinear growth models for modeling oil palm yield growth. Journal of Mathematics and Statistics, 1 (3): 225-233.
Kuhi H D, Kebreab E, Lopez S et al. 2003. An evaluation of different growth functions for describing the profile of live weight with time (age) in meat and egg strains of chicken. Poultry Science, 82 (10): 1 536-1 543.
Ma A J, Chen C, Lei J L et al. 2006. Turbot Scophthalmus maximus : stocking density on growth, pigmentation and feed conversion. Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 24 (3): 307-312.
Meyer A. 1987. Phenotypic plasticity and heterochrony in Cichlasoma managuense (Pisces, Chichlidae) and their implications for speciation in cichlid fishes. Evolution, 41 (6): 1 357-1 369.
Pigliucci M. 2005. Evolution of phenotypic plasticity: where are we going now? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20 (9): 481-486.
Roush W B, Branton S L. 2005. A comparison of fitting growth models with a genetic algorithm and nonlinear regression. Poult ry Science, 84 (3): 494-502.
Ruan X H, Wang W J, Kong J et al. 2011. Isolation and analysis of microsatellites in the genome of turbot (Scophthalmus maximus L.). African Journal of Biotechnology, 10 (4): 507-508.
Shi C H, Wu J G, Fan L J et al. 2001. Developmental genetic analysis of brown rice weight under different environmental conditions in indica rice. Acta Botanica Sinica, 43 (6): 603-609.
Shi C H, Wu J G, Lou X B et al. 2002. Genetic analysis of transparency and chalkiness area at different filling stages of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Field Crops Research, 76 (1): 1-9.
Wang C H, Li S F, Liu Z G et al. 2006. Developmental quantitative genetic analysis of body weight and morphological traits in red common carp, Cyprinus carpio L. Aquaculture, 251 (2-4): 219-230.
Wang X A, Ma A J, Huang Z H et al. 2010. Heritability and genetic correlation of survival in turbot (Scophthalmus maximus). Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 28 (6): 1 200-1 205.
Wang X A, Ma A J, Huang Z H et al. 2014. Developmental differences between female and male groups in turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) breeding families. Journal of Fisheries of China, 38 (4): 464-469. (in Chinese with English abstract)
West-Eberhard M J. 1989. Phenotypic plasticity and the origins of diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and System atics, 20 (1): 249-278.
Zhu J. 1995. Analysis of conditional genetic effects and variance components in developmental genetics. Genetics, 141 (4): 1 633-1 639.
Copyright © Haiyang Xuebao