Influence of a growth hormone transgene on the genetic architecture of growth-related traits: A comparative analysis between transgenic and wild-type coho salmon

Abstract

Genetic engineering has been increasingly applied to many commercially important plant and animal species, generating phenotypic changes that are not observed in natural populations and creating genetic interactions that have not experienced natural selection. The degree to and way in which such human-induced genetic variation interacts with the rest of the genome is currently largely unknown. Integrating such information into ecological and risk assessment frameworks is crucial to understand the potential effects of genetically modified organisms in natural environments. Here, we performed QTL mapping to investigate the genetic architecture of growth-related traits in nontransgenic (NT) and growth hormone transgenic (T) coho salmon with large changes in growth and related physiology, with the aim of identifying how an inserted transgene might influence the opportunity for selection. These fish shared the same parental genetic background, thus allowing us to determine whether the same or different loci influence these traits within the two groups. The use of over 1,700 loci, derived from restriction site-associated DNA sequencing, revealed that different genomic regions were linked with growth over time between the two groups. Additionally, the effect sizes of detected QTL appear to have been influenced by the transgene. Direct comparison of QTL between the T and NT fish during two size-matched periods identified little overlap in their location. Taken together, the results showed that the transgene altered the genetic basis of growth-related traits in this species. The study has important implications for effective conservation and management of wild populations experiencing introduction of transgenes. Evolutionary changes and their ecological consequences may occur at different rates and in different directions in NT versus T individuals in response to selection. Thus, assessments of phenotypic change, and hence ecological risk, should be determined periodically to evaluate whether initial estimates made with founder strains remain valid.