An examination of a different breeding methods
We have hatchery produced seed from two different years (2010 and 2011). Each year used a different method in order to define the breeding groups.
In 2010, all of the seed from each group of broodstock was collected and considered a family. In 2011, each day all of the new larvae were collected (from between broodstock groups) and were considered a family.
Year
|
Total (currently) analyzed
|
Original Family Label
|
Estimated Total Alive
|
2010
|
4
|
2
|
10
|
2010
|
10
|
5
|
550
|
2010
|
10
|
14
|
450
|
2010
|
10
|
16
|
30
|
2010
|
10
|
17
|
100
|
2010
|
10
|
18
|
100
|
2010
|
10
|
19
|
725
|
2010
|
4
|
22
|
5
|
2010
|
10
|
23
|
425
|
2010
|
10
|
24
|
600
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.002
|
25
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.007
|
25
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.011
|
400
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.013
|
10
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.014
|
300
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.015
|
400
|
2011
|
9
|
11x5.018
|
10
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.019
|
400
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.022
|
650
|
2011
|
10
|
11x5.024
|
24
|
We are interested in a few main points:
- Do the two breeding methods differ in producing diverse/unrelated offspring?
- How does the diversity of the hatchery produced seed compare to wild populations?
We are using 8 microsatellite markers to calculate pairwise relatedness between individuals and families. So far, we have only processed about half of the samples that we have, we will probably process the rest after getting an idea of what the data looks like. We also have access to data from wild populations of South Sound (courtesy of David Stick). The alleles, themselves, between the wild and the hatchery populations won't be directly comparable because they were obtained using different methods; however, the relatedness values that we get will be comparable.