Interesting article with research on hybrid clams

hart24601

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
6,579
Reaction score
6,633
Location
Iowa
Rating - 0%
0   0   0

outerbank

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
May 9, 2018
Messages
269
Reaction score
501
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Cool article. Thanks for posting. I have 2 mimosas. I bought one Sept 19 and another Jan 3. They are beautiful, so far hardy, and the first one is growing fast (almost gigas fast) and the other is too new to observe growth rate. I suspect the zooxanthellae from maxima and the huge mantle from the squamosa may increase energy efficiency and contribute to their hardiness and growth
 
OP
OP
hart24601

hart24601

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
6,579
Reaction score
6,633
Location
Iowa
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Cool article. Thanks for posting. I have 2 mimosas. I bought one Sept 19 and another Jan 3. They are beautiful, so far hardy, and the first one is growing fast (almost gigas fast) and the other is too new to observe growth rate. I suspect the zooxanthellae from maxima and the huge mantle from the squamosa may increase energy efficiency and contribute to their hardiness and growth
That’s great to hear!!
 

biologyguy

New Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
They are using a microsatellite marker to confirm the genetics but the PCR they present as evidence seems a bit odd. It isn't well explained in the methods, so I infer that samples 1-2, 3-5, 6-8, and 9-10 are respectively replicate PCRs from the same individual or possibly even replicate lanes loaded from the same reactions (I make this assumption because of the extreme similarity within each group). The two parental samples (1-2 and 9-10) appear to be homozygous for markers at ~210bp and ~250bp, respectively (btw, these are reported as 160bp and 200bp in the results text...), while the offspring samples appear to be heterozygous for markers at 250bp and clearly something either a little smaller (3-5) or a little larger (6-8) than the ~210bp marker from 1-2. This indicates that 3-8 may be the offspring of 9-10, but are not the offspring of 1-2.
Given that eggs were pooled from three individuals from each species and sperm was pooled from three different individuals from each species, for a total of only 12 individuals, there is no reason to not run PCR on all parental broodstock. This single figure could have been the slam dunk to prove hybridization, but instead I'm left scratching my head.
Also, the authors report a suspiciously strong similarity between the hybrid's shell characteristics and the characteristics of the conspecific fertilization pool that matches the maternal species. Frankly, this is what I would expect is self fertilization occurred in the hybrid treatment.
I'd be pretty excited to see convincing evidence of hybridization; unfortunately this article comes up a bit short in my opinion.

1579054039821.png
 
OP
OP
hart24601

hart24601

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
6,579
Reaction score
6,633
Location
Iowa
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
They are using a microsatellite marker to confirm the genetics but the PCR they present as evidence seems a bit odd. It isn't well explained in the methods, so I infer that samples 1-2, 3-5, 6-8, and 9-10 are respectively replicate PCRs from the same individual or possibly even replicate lanes loaded from the same reactions (I make this assumption because of the extreme similarity within each group). The two parental samples (1-2 and 9-10) appear to be homozygous for markers at ~210bp and ~250bp, respectively (btw, these are reported as 160bp and 200bp in the results text...), while the offspring samples appear to be heterozygous for markers at 250bp and clearly something either a little smaller (3-5) or a little larger (6-8) than the ~210bp marker from 1-2. This indicates that 3-8 may be the offspring of 9-10, but are not the offspring of 1-2.
Given that eggs were pooled from three individuals from each species and sperm was pooled from three different individuals from each species, for a total of only 12 individuals, there is no reason to not run PCR on all parental broodstock. This single figure could have been the slam dunk to prove hybridization, but instead I'm left scratching my head.
Also, the authors report a suspiciously strong similarity between the hybrid's shell characteristics and the characteristics of the conspecific fertilization pool that matches the maternal species. Frankly, this is what I would expect is self fertilization occurred in the hybrid treatment.
I'd be pretty excited to see convincing evidence of hybridization; unfortunately this article comes up a bit short in my opinion.

1579054039821.png

email the authors and express your concerns, most the time they are thrilled to talk about it.
 

DSC reef

Coral wasted
View Badges
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
15,906
Reaction score
50,359
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm glad they're putting science behind this. I've bought a squamosa hybrid before from ORA and honestly thought it was just a money grab as they couldn't guarantee genetics ofcourse. It looked pretty cool though.
20160605_124130.jpg
 

Creating a strong bulwark: Did you consider floor support for your reef tank?

  • I put a major focus on floor support.

    Votes: 53 40.2%
  • I put minimal focus on floor support.

    Votes: 27 20.5%
  • I put no focus on floor support.

    Votes: 48 36.4%
  • Other.

    Votes: 4 3.0%
Back
Top