Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2001;111(1-3):155-73.
doi: 10.1023/a:1013776931796.

Genetic manipulations in aquaculture: a review of stock improvement by classical and modern technologies

Affiliations
Review

Genetic manipulations in aquaculture: a review of stock improvement by classical and modern technologies

G Hulata. Genetica. 2001.

Abstract

The aim of this review was to highlight the extent to which the genetic technologies are implemented by the aquaculture industry. The review shows that some of the modern genetic technologies are already extensively applied by the diverse aquaculture industries, though not to the same extent for all important aquacultured species (according to FAO 1998 figures). Some species (common carp, Atlantic salmon, rainbow trout, channel catfish, Nile tilapia, and the Pacific oyster) received concentrated breeding efforts, while other major cultured species (Chinese and Indian carps and the giant tiger shrimp) received, so far, relatively limited attention, and a few species (Yesso scallop, blue mussel, white Amur bream, and milkfish) have, apparently, not been genetically improved at all. Most of the genetically improved strains reaching the aquaculture industry were developed through traditional selective breeding (selection, crossbreeding, and hybridization). Emerging, more modern technologies for genetic manipulation seem to take 10-20 years from being established experimentally until applications affect the industry. Thus, chromosome-set and sex manipulations started to affect the industry during the 1980's and 1990's. DNA marker technology and gene manipulations have yet hardly affected the industry. The former have not matured yet, but hold much promise. The latter could have affected the industry already had it not been restricted by public concern.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Genetics. 1998 Feb;148(2):839-50 - PubMed
    1. Evolution. 1994 Apr;48(2):267-286 - PubMed
    1. Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol. 1992 Aug-Oct;1(4-5):338-45 - PubMed
    1. Mol Reprod Dev. 2000 Jun;56(2):149-54 - PubMed
    1. Nature. 1985 Jul 4-10;316(6023):76-9 - PubMed

Substances

LinkOut - more resources