MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411570513 · doi:10.1051/alr/2025006

States of development and application of genetic and genomic tools in aquaculture and conservation programs: a guide for strengthening dialogue among practitioners of aquaculture and genetics

2025· article· en· W4411570513 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine M. Purcell, Brendan F. Wringe, Pierre Boudry, Marine Servane Ono Brieuc, Mark W. Coulson, Tony Kess, Monica F. Solberg, Harri Vehviläinen, Federico C. F. Calboli

Bibliographic record

VenueAquatic Living Resources · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNational Marine Fisheries ServiceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsAquacultureConservation geneticsBiologyFisheryBiotechnologyBusinessGeneticsFish <Actinopterygii>GeneAlleleMicrosatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout all stages of fish conservation and aquaculture development, genetic and genomic approaches can be leveraged to enhance understanding of the diversity and complexity of these organisms, including the linkage between phenotype and genotype, and their adaptive and breeding potential. These approaches can inform processes ranging from the initial collection of wild broodstock to the ongoing use of genomic selection on domesticated lines. Due to the diversity in cultured fish species, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) commonly explore new species for culture, or work with species within a narrow regional conservation or commercial focus. These enterprises face obstacles in utilising genetic and genomic approaches due to development and implementation costs, specialised skill set requirements, and infrastructure and labour limitations; yet the benefits often outweigh these challenges. Choosing the best molecular genetic or genomic tools depends on programme goals and species, but small and medium enterprises may miss opportunities to acquire more information through their current approaches, or not realise what may be gained through modest investments in genomic tools. To provide better insight and promote discussion and collaboration between culturists and genomic practitioners, we define and describe five States of development and application of genetic and genomic tools frequently observed in aquaculture and conservation breeding programs. We characterise these tools, their general applications, and how current technologies allow programs to advance to higher States without following a sequential progression, a concept we refer to as “State skipping”. This document outlines the available molecular genetic and genomic tools, but does not cover animal breeding or the science behind it. Similarly, bioeconomic models are not included, although relative economic costs and benefits are highlighted. The technical considerations and limitations of various approaches are reviewed, along with available resources for those seeking further support in exploring genetic and genomic tools in breeding programmes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquatic Living ResourcesSame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207