# Genome-wide detection of positive and balancing signatures of selection shared by four domesticated rainbow trout populations (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

Katy Paul, Gwendal Restoux, Florence Phocas

► To cite this version:

Katy Paul, Gwendal Restoux, Florence Phocas. Genome-wide detection of positive and balancing signatures of selection shared by four domesticated rainbow trout populations (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Genetics Selection Evolution, 2024, 56, 10.1186/s12711-024-00884-9. http://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04474238

HAL Id: hal-04474238

https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04474238

Submitted on 23 Feb 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Genome-wide detection of positive and balancing signatures of selection shared by four domesticated rainbow trout populations (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

Katy Paul, Gwendal Restoux, Florence Phocas

► To cite this version:

Katy Paul, Gwendal Restoux, Florence Phocas. Genome-wide detection of positive and balancing signatures of selection shared by four domesticated rainbow trout populations (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Genetics Selection Evolution, 2024, 56, 10.1186/s12711-024-00884-9. http://hal-inrae.fr/hal-04474238

HAL Id: hal-04474238

https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04474238v1

Submitted on 23 Feb 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Open Access

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Check for
updates

# Genome-wide detection of positive and balancing signatures of selection shared by four domesticated rainbow trout populations (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*)

Katy Paul¹, Gwendal Restoux¹ and Florence Phocas¹*

**Abstract**

**Background** Evolutionary processes leave footprints along the genome over time. Highly homozygous regions may correspond to positive selection of favorable alleles, while maintenance of heterozygous regions may be due to balancing selection phenomena. We analyzed data from 176 fish from four disconnected domestic rainbow trout populations that were genotyped using a high-density Axiom Trout genotyping 665K single nucleotide polymorphism array, including 20 from the US and 156 from three French lines. Using methods based on runs of homozygosity and extended haplotype homozygosity, we detected signatures of selection in these four populations.

**Results** Nine genomic regions that included 253 genes were identified as being under positive selection in all four populations. Most were located on chromosome 2 but also on chromosomes 12, 15, 16, and 20. In addition, four heterozygous regions that contain 29 genes that are putatively under balancing selection were also shared by the four populations. These were located on chromosomes 10, 13, and 19. Regardless of the homozygous or heterozygous nature of the regions, in each region, we detected several genes that are highly conserved among vertebrates due to their critical roles in cellular and nuclear organization, embryonic development, or immunity. We identified new candidate genes involved in rainbow trout fitness, as well as 17 genes that were previously identified to be under positive selection, 10 of which in other fishes (*auts2*, *atp1b3*, *zp4*, *znf135*, *igf-1a*, *brd2*, *col9a2*, *mrap2*, *pbx1*, and *emilin-3*).

**Conclusions** Using material from disconnected populations of different origins allowed us to draw a genome-wide map of signatures of positive selection that are shared between these rainbow trout populations, and to identify several regions that are putatively under balancing selection. These results provide a valuable resource for future investigations of the dynamics of genetic diversity and genome evolution during domestication.

**Background**

Any animal or plant population, wild or domesticated, evolves through continuous and cumulative changes over time [1] that rely on various evolutionary forces, i.e.

mutation, migration, selection, and genetic drift, with relative effects that may vary depending on population history and structure. For example, when the effective population size is small, genetic drift is more significant and randomly induces fixation of alleles. This can lead to degeneration and extinction of small populations due to the fixation of deleterious alleles [2]. When environmental conditions change, allele frequencies will change to a new relevant equilibrium as a result of natural selection. Indeed, alleles that are favorable in a particular

<footnote>*Correspondence:
Florence Phocas
florence.phocas@inrae.fr
¹ Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, GABI, 78350 Jouy-en-Josas,
France</footnote>
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Open Access

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Check for
updates

# Genome-wide detection of positive and balancing signatures of selection shared by four domesticated rainbow trout populations (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*)

Katy Paul¹, Gwendal Restoux¹ and Florence Phocas¹*

**Abstract**

**Background** Evolutionary processes leave footprints along the genome over time. Highly homozygous regions may correspond to positive selection of favorable alleles, while maintenance of heterozygous regions may be due to balancing selection phenomena. We analyzed data from 176 fish from four disconnected domestic rainbow trout populations that were genotyped using a high-density Axiom Trout genotyping 665K single nucleotide polymorphism array, including 20 from the US and 156 from three French lines. Using methods based on runs of homozygosity and extended haplotype homozygosity, we detected signatures of selection in these four populations.

**Results** Nine genomic regions that included 253 genes were identified as being under positive selection in all four populations. Most were located on chromosome 2 but also on chromosomes 12, 15, 16, and 20. In addition, four heterozygous regions that contain 29 genes that are putatively under balancing selection were also shared by the four populations. These were located on chromosomes 10, 13, and 19. Regardless of the homozygous or heterozygous nature of the regions, in each region, we detected several genes that are highly conserved among vertebrates due to their critical roles in cellular and nuclear organization, embryonic development, or immunity. We identified new candidate genes involved in rainbow trout fitness, as well as 17 genes that were previously identified to be under positive selection, 10 of which in other fishes (*auts2*, *atp1b3*, *zp4*, *znf135*, *igf-1a*, *brd2*, *col9a2*, *mrap2*, *pbx1*, and *emilin-3*).

**Conclusions** Using material from disconnected populations of different origins allowed us to draw a genome-wide map of signatures of positive selection that are shared between these rainbow trout populations, and to identify several regions that are putatively under balancing selection. These results provide a valuable resource for future investigations of the dynamics of genetic diversity and genome evolution during domestication.

**Background**

Any animal or plant population, wild or domesticated, evolves through continuous and cumulative changes over time [1] that rely on various evolutionary forces, i.e.

mutation, migration, selection, and genetic drift, with relative effects that may vary depending on population history and structure. For example, when the effective population size is small, genetic drift is more significant and randomly induces fixation of alleles. This can lead to degeneration and extinction of small populations due to the fixation of deleterious alleles [2]. When environmental conditions change, allele frequencies will change to a new relevant equilibrium as a result of natural selection. Indeed, alleles that are favorable in a particular

<footnote>*Correspondence:
Florence Phocas
florence.phocas@inrae.fr
¹ Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, GABI, 78350 Jouy-en-Josas,
France</footnote>
environment because they carry new mutations or
because of standing variation, will be positively selected.
In wild populations, favorable alleles generally affect fit-
ness through individual survival, mating, or fertility [3, 4].
Natural selection can also act by negative (or purifying)
selection that hinders the spread of deleterious alleles [5].
These two processes tend to reduce genetic diversity at
the target genes but have different effects on the genome,
with positive selection leading to stronger signatures of
selection than negative selection. Conversely, polymor-
phisms within a population can be actively maintained in
some genomic regions through balancing selection that
maintains an equilibrium in the frequencies of alleles.
The two main biological causes of balancing selection are
heterozygote advantage at a single locus, known as the
overdominance effect, and frequency-dependent selec-
tion, with a rare-allele advantage that tends to restore an
equilibrium of the frequencies of alleles at the population
level [6, 7].

Domestication is the evolutionary process of genetic
adaptation of a wild population to human handling and
breeding in captive environments over generations
[8–10]. During domestication, humans exert artificial
selection pressure by choosing for reproduction the indi-
viduals that are most adapted to cohabitation and have
aptitudes that best fit their needs [11, 12], such as less
fearfulness of humans [13, 14]. Domestication induces
severe genetic bottlenecks due to the selection and repro-
duction of only a few adapted animals from the wild pop-
ulation. Thus, many genetic evolutionary processes have
a significant role in the evolution of farmed animal popu-
lations, including selection, genetic drift, and inbreeding
[15, 16]. Domestication affects life history traits due to
changes in morphological, physiological, reproductive,
behavioral, and immune functions [16–18] compared to
their wild relatives [8, 9]. Wilkins et al. [19] suggested that
these specific modifications, called the domestication
syndrome, may be due to a mild deficit in neural-crest
cells during embryonic development in domesticated
animals. In addition, both natural and artificial selec-
tion of domesticated populations leave footprints across
the genome, known as signatures of selection, which can
point to regions that harbor essential genes for domesti-
cation or survival [20–22].

Compared to terrestrial animals [16], domestication
of fish is recent and was first documented with carp
about 2000 years ago [23]. The precise date and location
(Neolithic China or during the Roman period in Central
and East Europe) of the domestication of carp are still
debated [23, 24]. However, most farmed fish species have
only been domesticated since the last century. Rainbow
trout is native to the Pacific drainages of North America
and to Kamchatka in Russia and its domestication started

in the 1870s in California [25, 26], and domesticated fish
were then introduced in Western Europe at the begin-
ning of the twentieth century [27].

Numerous studies have been carried out over the last
ten years to detect signatures of selection in farmed fish
species (channel catfish [28]; Atlantic salmon [29–33];
carp [34]; Nile tilapia [35–37]; rainbow trout [38]; Coho
salmon [39]; Australasian snapper [40]; brown trout [41])
in order to identify genomic regions that are involved
in recent adaptation or domestication processes [42,
43]. Various approaches have been developed to detect
signatures of selection within populations based on
site frequency spectrum, linkage disequilibrium (LD),
or reduction in local variability [44, 45]. Among these
approaches, we used two strategies, one based on the
reduction of local variability using runs of homozygosity
(ROH) metrics and the second based on allele frequen-
cies and the extent of LD, using extended haplotype
homozygosity (EHH). A ROH is a long homozygous
stretch in the genome of an individual that is putatively
homozygous by descent and thus inherited from a com-
mon ancestor to its parents [46, 47], while EHH measures
the extent of shared haplotypes through the association
between a single core haplotype and multiple loci at vari-
ous distances from the core region [48].

In this study, we were interested in the identification
of genes that have been under either positive or bal-
ancing selection in farmed rainbow trout populations,
since this species is one of the oldest domesticated
fish. The wild populations present in the McCloud
River basin of North California are thought to be the
origins of all strains that are currently domesticated
[49, 50]. Early domestication events were traced back
to the 1870s and France was one of the first countries
that imported domesticated strains [51]. Only a few
studies on signatures of selection have been performed
in rainbow trout, of which three focused on wild popu-
lations and showed signatures of selection that were
linked to life-history variation, egg development,
spawning time [52], immune response [53], and smolt-
ification [54]. The first study in domesticated rainbow
trout was performed on a single Chilean population
[38] that was genotyped with a 57K single nucleotide
polymorphism (SNP) array and showed that the identi-
fied signatures of selection were associated with early
development, growth, reproduction, and the immune
system. Recently, a high-density array (665K single
nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) was developed for
rainbow trout [55], allowing us to potentially detect
signatures of selection more accurately and to compare
them across various domesticated rainbow trout popu-
lations. The presence of signatures of selection that are
shared by multiple disconnected farmed populations
environment because they carry new mutations or
because of standing variation, will be positively selected.
In wild populations, favorable alleles generally affect fit-
ness through individual survival, mating, or fertility [3, 4].
Natural selection can also act by negative (or purifying)
selection that hinders the spread of deleterious alleles [5].
These two processes tend to reduce genetic diversity at
the target genes but have different effects on the genome,
with positive selection leading to stronger signatures of
selection than negative selection. Conversely, polymor-
phisms within a population can be actively maintained in
some genomic regions through balancing selection that
maintains an equilibrium in the frequencies of alleles.
The two main biological causes of balancing selection are
heterozygote advantage at a single locus, known as the
overdominance effect, and frequency-dependent selec-
tion, with a rare-allele advantage that tends to restore an
equilibrium of the frequencies of alleles at the population
level [6, 7].

Domestication is the evolutionary process of genetic
adaptation of a wild population to human handling and
breeding in captive environments over generations
[8–10]. During domestication, humans exert artificial
selection pressure by choosing for reproduction the indi-
viduals that are most adapted to cohabitation and have
aptitudes that best fit their needs [11, 12], such as less
fearfulness of humans [13, 14]. Domestication induces
severe genetic bottlenecks due to the selection and repro-
duction of only a few adapted animals from the wild pop-
ulation. Thus, many genetic evolutionary processes have
a significant role in the evolution of farmed animal popu-
lations, including selection, genetic drift, and inbreeding
[15, 16]. Domestication affects life history traits due to
changes in morphological, physiological, reproductive,
behavioral, and immune functions [16–18] compared to
their wild relatives [8, 9]. Wilkins et al. [19] suggested that
these specific modifications, called the domestication
syndrome, may be due to a mild deficit in neural-crest
cells during embryonic development in domesticated
animals. In addition, both natural and artificial selec-
tion of domesticated populations leave footprints across
the genome, known as signatures of selection, which can
point to regions that harbor essential genes for domesti-
cation or survival [20–22].

Compared to terrestrial animals [16], domestication
of fish is recent and was first documented with carp
about 2000 years ago [23]. The precise date and location
(Neolithic China or during the Roman period in Central
and East Europe) of the domestication of carp are still
debated [23, 24]. However, most farmed fish species have
only been domesticated since the last century. Rainbow
trout is native to the Pacific drainages of North America
and to Kamchatka in Russia and its domestication started

in the 1870s in California [25, 26], and domesticated fish
were then introduced in Western Europe at the begin-
ning of the twentieth century [27].

Numerous studies have been carried out over the last
ten years to detect signatures of selection in farmed fish
species (channel catfish [28]; Atlantic salmon [29–33];
carp [34]; Nile tilapia [35–37]; rainbow trout [38]; Coho
salmon [39]; Australasian snapper [40]; brown trout [41])
in order to identify genomic regions that are involved
in recent adaptation or domestication processes [42,
43]. Various approaches have been developed to detect
signatures of selection within populations based on
site frequency spectrum, linkage disequilibrium (LD),
or reduction in local variability [44, 45]. Among these
approaches, we used two strategies, one based on the
reduction of local variability using runs of homozygosity
(ROH) metrics and the second based on allele frequen-
cies and the extent of LD, using extended haplotype
homozygosity (EHH). A ROH is a long homozygous
stretch in the genome of an individual that is putatively
homozygous by descent and thus inherited from a com-
mon ancestor to its parents [46, 47], while EHH measures
the extent of shared haplotypes through the association
between a single core haplotype and multiple loci at vari-
ous distances from the core region [48].

In this study, we were interested in the identification
of genes that have been under either positive or bal-
ancing selection in farmed rainbow trout populations,
since this species is one of the oldest domesticated
fish. The wild populations present in the McCloud
River basin of North California are thought to be the
origins of all strains that are currently domesticated
[49, 50]. Early domestication events were traced back
to the 1870s and France was one of the first countries
that imported domesticated strains [51]. Only a few
studies on signatures of selection have been performed
in rainbow trout, of which three focused on wild popu-
lations and showed signatures of selection that were
linked to life-history variation, egg development,
spawning time [52], immune response [53], and smolt-
ification [54]. The first study in domesticated rainbow
trout was performed on a single Chilean population
[38] that was genotyped with a 57K single nucleotide
polymorphism (SNP) array and showed that the identi-
fied signatures of selection were associated with early
development, growth, reproduction, and the immune
system. Recently, a high-density array (665K single
nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) was developed for
rainbow trout [55], allowing us to potentially detect
signatures of selection more accurately and to compare
them across various domesticated rainbow trout popu-
lations. The presence of signatures of selection that are
shared by multiple disconnected farmed populations
from different geographical areas allows the identification of genomic regions that are effectively linked to the domestication process or to fitness and thus avoids identification of local signatures that are present only in some populations. This approach will help to better understand the genomic processes at play and the subsequent dynamics of genetic diversity in rainbow trout, by identifying genes that have key roles in either the domestication process or in fitness [56, 57].

In this study, we considered four populations: one INRAE experimental line (with no intentional selection) that displays a wide diversity due to its multiple origins, two French selection lines each from a different breeding company, and a pooled American population that includes samples from one wild river and four hatchery strains, all from the North-West of the USA and closely linked genetically [58]. The availability of such a variety of origins should allow us to detect, genomic regions for which it was biologically important that they remained either homozygous or heterozygous, independent of the history of the investigated strains. This is also why we chose a North-American population rather than a Californian one.

The aim of our work was to discover genomic regions with a high level of homozygosity (positive selection) or heterozygosity (balancing selection) that are shared across the four rainbow trout populations and to get further insights into the nature of the genes that span these regions.

# Methods

## Populations

Three French populations were considered: 14 breeding females from the INRAE synthetic line SY and, 90 and 72 females from selection lines LB and LC from the breeding companies "Bretagne Truite" (Plouigneau, France) and "Viviers de Sarrance" (Sarrance, France) respectively. As described by D'Ambrosio et al. [59], the two commercial lines were selected on individual growth by optimized within-group mass selection and on carcass traits based on sib testing. Genotyped females from the LB and LC lines (previously described as SB and SC in [59]) were breeders from the 8th and 10th generations of their respective selected lines. The SY line was developed by intercrossing several domesticated lines of rainbow trout, in order to create a population with a large diversity [59].

We also analyzed the whole-genome sequence data from 20 fishes from a pooled population of American trout described by Gao et al. [58]. The 20 fish included four individuals at each of five locations from the North-West of the USA: wild fish from Elwha River, and farmed fish from Dworshak, L. Quinault, Quinault, and Skamania hatcheries. We pooled these 20 individuals together, as these five populations were genetically close to each other (see Additional file 1: Fig. S1a; [58]) and very distant from the three French populations (Fig. 1).

## Genotyping and quality control

High-density genotypes were obtained at the INRAE genotyping platform Gentyane (Clermont-Ferrand,

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1** Principal component analysis (PCA) of the genetic diversity of the five North American subpopulations from the HA population based on 546,903 SNPs. Elwha is the only wild population</figcaption></figure>
from different geographical areas allows the identification of genomic regions that are effectively linked to the domestication process or to fitness and thus avoids identification of local signatures that are present only in some populations. This approach will help to better understand the genomic processes at play and the subsequent dynamics of genetic diversity in rainbow trout, by identifying genes that have key roles in either the domestication process or in fitness [56, 57].

In this study, we considered four populations: one INRAE experimental line (with no intentional selection) that displays a wide diversity due to its multiple origins, two French selection lines each from a different breeding company, and a pooled American population that includes samples from one wild river and four hatchery strains, all from the North-West of the USA and closely linked genetically [58]. The availability of such a variety of origins should allow us to detect, genomic regions for which it was biologically important that they remained either homozygous or heterozygous, independent of the history of the investigated strains. This is also why we chose a North-American population rather than a Californian one.

The aim of our work was to discover genomic regions with a high level of homozygosity (positive selection) or heterozygosity (balancing selection) that are shared across the four rainbow trout populations and to get further insights into the nature of the genes that span these regions.

# Methods

## Populations

Three French populations were considered: 14 breeding females from the INRAE synthetic line SY and, 90 and 72 females from selection lines LB and LC from the breeding companies "Bretagne Truite" (Plouigneau, France) and "Viviers de Sarrance" (Sarrance, France) respectively. As described by D'Ambrosio et al. [59], the two commercial lines were selected on individual growth by optimized within-group mass selection and on carcass traits based on sib testing. Genotyped females from the LB and LC lines (previously described as SB and SC in [59]) were breeders from the 8th and 10th generations of their respective selected lines. The SY line was developed by intercrossing several domesticated lines of rainbow trout, in order to create a population with a large diversity [59].

We also analyzed the whole-genome sequence data from 20 fishes from a pooled population of American trout described by Gao et al. [58]. The 20 fish included four individuals at each of five locations from the North-West of the USA: wild fish from Elwha River, and farmed fish from Dworshak, L. Quinault, Quinault, and Skamania hatcheries. We pooled these 20 individuals together, as these five populations were genetically close to each other (see Additional file 1: Fig. S1a; [58]) and very distant from the three French populations (Fig. 1).

## Genotyping and quality control

High-density genotypes were obtained at the INRAE genotyping platform Gentyane (Clermont-Ferrand,

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1** Principal component analysis (PCA) of the genetic diversity of the five North American subpopulations from the HA population based on 546,903 SNPs. Elwha is the only wild population</figcaption></figure>
France) for the 176 French samples using the Affymetrix 665K SNP array that was recently developed for rainbow trout [55]. We considered only the genotypes for the 576,118 SNPs of the Rainbow trout Axiom® 665K SNP array that were positioned on the Arlee reference genome (GCA_013265735.3, [55, 60]). From the whole-genome sequence information of the 20 American samples [58], we extracted the genotypes for the same 576,118 SNPs. Among the 176 French genotyped fish, 19 individuals with more than 30% identity-by-state (IBS) with other individuals were removed from the dataset, leaving 76, 67, 20, and 14 fish from the LB, LC, HA, and SY populations, respectively.

SNP quality control was performed using the PLINK v1.9 software [61]. To avoid limitations due to the small number of individuals in the SY population, quality filters were applied to the LC and SY individuals together, as both these populations were genotyped on the same SNP plate and are genetically close [59]. SNPs with a call rate lower than 97% were removed as well as about 4000 SNPs randomly distributed along the genome due to extreme deviations from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (p-value < 10⁻⁷). This allowed us to discard SNPs with a high risk of genotyping errors and a low probability of being under selection. We retained 571,319, 569,030, and 573,793 SNPs for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively. Finally, by merging the three SNP lists, we kept the 546,903 common SNPs for further analysis.

## Genetic structure of the populations

Genetic differentiation between the populations was measured using the pairwise Fst estimate in the VCFtools v0.1.13 software [62]. In addition, a principal component analysis (PCA) was performed with the R package *Adegenet* (function *glPca*) [63] to visualize the genetic structure of the populations.

## Runs of homozygosity

Runs of homozygosity (ROH) were identified for each fish using the PLINK v1.9 *homozyg* function [61] with the following options `-homozyg-kb 500 -homozyg-window-snp 40 -homozyg-snp 40 -homozyg-gap 500 -homozyg-density 40 -homozyg-het 1`. A ROH was defined by a sliding window with a minimum length of 500 kb and at least 40 homozygous SNPs. This minimum number of homozygous SNPs was chosen using the formula described by Purfield et al. [47] in order to limit the number of ROH that can occur by chance. Up to one possible homozygous genotype was permitted for each ROH.

## Estimation of inbreeding coefficients

Individual inbreeding coefficients ($F_{ROH}$) were calculated according to McQuillan et al. [46] as

$$F_{i,ROH} = \frac{\sum length(ROH_i)}{LGenome},$$ where $\sum length(ROH_i)$ is the sum of the lengths of ROH for individual *i* and *LGenome* is the total length of the autosomal genome covered by SNPs.

## Identification of ROH islands

For each SNP, the number of individuals with this SNP included in a ROH was calculated in order to identify regions of the genome that were frequently homozygous in each population, i.e. constituting ROH islands [64], which can be considered as signatures of positive selection [65]. To allow for comparison of ROH islands across populations, we implemented population-specific thresholds based on the number of individuals with a ROH to define ROH islands, as proposed in many studies, with an empirical SNP-based threshold for each population equal to the number of individuals with a ROH observed for the top 5% of SNPs, rather than the top 1% that is used in many studies [66–72]. The use of a less stringent threshold was because our objective was to search for common regions across populations. These top 5% values were equivalent to 35, 27, 5, and 10 individuals for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively, which correspond to 48.6, 40.3, 35.7, and 50% of the individuals with a ROH in the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively. In addition, SNPs in the top 5% that were less than 500 kb apart were considered to fall in the same ROH island if the number of SNPs in the gap stretch between two SNPs of the top 5% was less than 40. The boundaries of a ROH island were defined so that a minimum of 30, 22, 3, and 7 individuals (thresholds for the top 10% of SNPs) were homozygous for any SNP within the ROH for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively.

## Detection of balancing selection signals based on regions without ROH

We used the information on ROH occurrence per SNP to detect extreme heterozygous regions, i.e. without ROH. These regions have an enrichment of heterozygous SNPs relative to the genome-wide prevalence, which may be due to balancing selection [73].

Applying the same criteria as used to define ROH, the minimum size and number of SNPs to define a heterozygous region were fixed to 500 kb and 40 SNPs, respectively. Moreover, two successive SNPs were considered in the same heterozygous region if they were separated by less than 50 kb. A region was defined as having an extreme level of heterozygosity (i.e., hotspot of polymorphism) if less than 5% of the individuals (per population) had SNPs in the ROH within the region, corresponding to a maximum of four and three individuals with a ROH in the LB and LC populations, respectively, and no individuals with a ROH in the SY and HA populations.
France) for the 176 French samples using the Affymetrix 665K SNP array that was recently developed for rainbow trout [55]. We considered only the genotypes for the 576,118 SNPs of the Rainbow trout Axiom® 665K SNP array that were positioned on the Arlee reference genome (GCA_013265735.3, [55, 60]). From the whole-genome sequence information of the 20 American samples [58], we extracted the genotypes for the same 576,118 SNPs. Among the 176 French genotyped fish, 19 individuals with more than 30% identity-by-state (IBS) with other individuals were removed from the dataset, leaving 76, 67, 20, and 14 fish from the LB, LC, HA, and SY populations, respectively.

SNP quality control was performed using the PLINK v1.9 software [61]. To avoid limitations due to the small number of individuals in the SY population, quality filters were applied to the LC and SY individuals together, as both these populations were genotyped on the same SNP plate and are genetically close [59]. SNPs with a call rate lower than 97% were removed as well as about 4000 SNPs randomly distributed along the genome due to extreme deviations from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (p-value < 10⁻⁷). This allowed us to discard SNPs with a high risk of genotyping errors and a low probability of being under selection. We retained 571,319, 569,030, and 573,793 SNPs for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively. Finally, by merging the three SNP lists, we kept the 546,903 common SNPs for further analysis.

## Genetic structure of the populations

Genetic differentiation between the populations was measured using the pairwise Fst estimate in the VCFtools v0.1.13 software [62]. In addition, a principal component analysis (PCA) was performed with the R package *Adegenet* (function *glPca*) [63] to visualize the genetic structure of the populations.

## Runs of homozygosity

Runs of homozygosity (ROH) were identified for each fish using the PLINK v1.9 *homozyg* function [61] with the following options `-homozyg-kb 500 -homozyg-window-snp 40 -homozyg-snp 40 -homozyg-gap 500 -homozyg-density 40 -homozyg-het 1`. A ROH was defined by a sliding window with a minimum length of 500 kb and at least 40 homozygous SNPs. This minimum number of homozygous SNPs was chosen using the formula described by Purfield et al. [47] in order to limit the number of ROH that can occur by chance. Up to one possible homozygous genotype was permitted for each ROH.

## Estimation of inbreeding coefficients

Individual inbreeding coefficients ($F_{ROH}$) were calculated according to McQuillan et al. [46] as

$$F_{i,ROH} = \frac{\sum length(ROH_i)}{LGenome},$$ where $\sum length(ROH_i)$ is the sum of the lengths of ROH for individual *i* and *LGenome* is the total length of the autosomal genome covered by SNPs.

## Identification of ROH islands

For each SNP, the number of individuals with this SNP included in a ROH was calculated in order to identify regions of the genome that were frequently homozygous in each population, i.e. constituting ROH islands [64], which can be considered as signatures of positive selection [65]. To allow for comparison of ROH islands across populations, we implemented population-specific thresholds based on the number of individuals with a ROH to define ROH islands, as proposed in many studies, with an empirical SNP-based threshold for each population equal to the number of individuals with a ROH observed for the top 5% of SNPs, rather than the top 1% that is used in many studies [66–72]. The use of a less stringent threshold was because our objective was to search for common regions across populations. These top 5% values were equivalent to 35, 27, 5, and 10 individuals for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively, which correspond to 48.6, 40.3, 35.7, and 50% of the individuals with a ROH in the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively. In addition, SNPs in the top 5% that were less than 500 kb apart were considered to fall in the same ROH island if the number of SNPs in the gap stretch between two SNPs of the top 5% was less than 40. The boundaries of a ROH island were defined so that a minimum of 30, 22, 3, and 7 individuals (thresholds for the top 10% of SNPs) were homozygous for any SNP within the ROH for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively.

## Detection of balancing selection signals based on regions without ROH

We used the information on ROH occurrence per SNP to detect extreme heterozygous regions, i.e. without ROH. These regions have an enrichment of heterozygous SNPs relative to the genome-wide prevalence, which may be due to balancing selection [73].

Applying the same criteria as used to define ROH, the minimum size and number of SNPs to define a heterozygous region were fixed to 500 kb and 40 SNPs, respectively. Moreover, two successive SNPs were considered in the same heterozygous region if they were separated by less than 50 kb. A region was defined as having an extreme level of heterozygosity (i.e., hotspot of polymorphism) if less than 5% of the individuals (per population) had SNPs in the ROH within the region, corresponding to a maximum of four and three individuals with a ROH in the LB and LC populations, respectively, and no individuals with a ROH in the SY and HA populations.
## Detection of signatures of selection based on extended haplotype homozygosity (EHH)

For a given focal allele, the EHH is defined as the probability that two randomly chosen chromosomes that carry the core haplotype of interest are identical-by-descent for the entire interval from the focal locus to the locus at distance x [48]. EHH measures the association between a single allele at the focal locus with multiple loci at various distances x from the focal locus [48]. The integrated haplotype homozygosity score (iHS) proposed by Voight et al. [74] compares the integrated EHH profiles obtained for a SNP in the ancestral versus derived states. An extreme value for iHS corresponds to positive selection because a focal haplotype with an unusually high EHH and a high frequency in the population indicates the presence of a mutation that has spread through the population at a faster rate than disruption of haplotypes by recombination.

Because the EHH methodology requires haplotype information, the genotype data must be phased before their calculation. We used FImpute3 [75] to phase the genotypes of the fish under study, by considering all the parents and offspring that were genotyped in the LB, LC, and SY populations for different purposes (see respectively [76–78]). All parents of the evaluated fish (except eight SY sires) were genotyped with the HD chip [55], while offspring (and eight SY sires) were genotyped with a 57K chip [79]. The information used for phasing is in Table 1. Due to the lack of genotyped offspring, only the HD genotypes were used to phase the genotypes of the HA population.

Once phasing was performed, the rehh R package [80, 81] was used to conduct EHH-based analyses. Detection of EHH was stopped when the EHH value was lower than 0.1 or when the gap between two consecutive SNPs was larger than 20 kb (scan_hh function with the following options: limehh = 0.1; maxgap = 20 kb).

<table><caption>**Table 1** Numbers of individuals and SNPs available after quality control that were used to phase the HD genotypes of the females under study that belonged to parental cohorts</caption><thead><tr><th>Line</th><th>Status of the individuals</th><th>Number of individuals</th><th>Number of SNPs used</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">LB</td><td>Parents</td><td>288</td><td>571,319</td></tr><tr><td>Offspring</td><td>1297</td><td>29,091</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">LC</td><td>Parents</td><td>173</td><td>569,03</td></tr><tr><td>Offspring</td><td>1350</td><td>30,379</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">SY</td><td>Parents (dams + 1 sire)</td><td>16</td><td>569,03</td></tr><tr><td>Offspring (+ 8 sires)</td><td>866</td><td>32,725</td></tr></tbody></table>

## Cross-population extended haplotype homozygosity (XP-EHH)

From the EHH information, we used the XP-EHH statistics (ies2xpehh function) to compare the integrated EHH profiles (iES) between a French (popA) and the HA (popB) populations at a focal SNP [82] as:

$$XP\_EHH = \frac{\ln\left(\frac{iES_{popA}}{iES_{popB}}\right) - Med\left[\ln\left(\frac{iES_{popA}}{iES_{popB}}\right)\right]}{SD\left[\ln\left(\frac{iES_{popA}}{iES_{popB}}\right)\right]}$$

where Med is the median and SD is the standard deviation of $\frac{iES_{popA}}{iES_{popB}}$, which were computed across all analysed SNPs.

## Integrated haplotype homozygosity score (iHS)

We used the iHS test [74] to evaluate evidence of positive selection based on haplotype frequencies in a single population, using the ihh2ihs function of the package rehh. This statistic is based on the log-ratio of the integrated EHH (iHH) for haplotypes with the ancestral (A) versus the derived (D) alleles and was computed for each autosomal SNP as $iHS = \frac{\ln\left(\frac{iHH_A}{iHH_D}\right) - Mean_p \ln\left(\frac{iHH_A}{iHH_D}\right)}{SD_p \ln\left(\frac{iHH_A}{iHH_D}\right)}$, where Mean_p is the average and (SD_p is the standard deviation of $\ln\left(\frac{iHH_A}{iHH_D}\right)$, which were computed across all the SNPs with a derived allele frequency p similar to that of the focal SNP. Since the state of the ancestral allele was unknown in our study, we arbitrarily assumed that the most frequent allele represents the ancestral state, as proposed by Bahbahani et al. [83]. This assumption is likely valid for neutral loci or for loci with mutant alleles that are under negative selection compared to the common wild type alleles. However, for domesticated or selected populations, the ancestral state is expected to be the most frequent allele under positive selection. However, as the iHS values are normally distributed [83], a two-tailed Z-test was applied to identify statistically significant SNPs under selection with an extended haplotype of either the ancestral (positive iHS value) or the derived alleles (negative iHS value). We then arbitrarily considered that any extreme iHS absolute value (i.e. |iHS|≥ 2.5) corresponds to a positive signature of selection either for the ancestral allele (iHs > 0) or for the derived allele (iHs < 0).

## Detection of candidate regions

To detect candidate regions for signatures of selection based on the iHS test, we used the calc_candidates_region function of the R package rehh [80]. We considered sliding windows of 500 kb along the genome that contained at least 30 SNPs and that overlapped by 10 kb. A region
## Detection of signatures of selection based on extended haplotype homozygosity (EHH)

For a given focal allele, the EHH is defined as the probability that two randomly chosen chromosomes that carry the core haplotype of interest are identical-by-descent for the entire interval from the focal locus to the locus at distance x [48]. EHH measures the association between a single allele at the focal locus with multiple loci at various distances x from the focal locus [48]. The integrated haplotype homozygosity score (iHS) proposed by Voight et al. [74] compares the integrated EHH profiles obtained for a SNP in the ancestral versus derived states. An extreme value for iHS corresponds to positive selection because a focal haplotype with an unusually high EHH and a high frequency in the population indicates the presence of a mutation that has spread through the population at a faster rate than disruption of haplotypes by recombination.

Because the EHH methodology requires haplotype information, the genotype data must be phased before their calculation. We used FImpute3 [75] to phase the genotypes of the fish under study, by considering all the parents and offspring that were genotyped in the LB, LC, and SY populations for different purposes (see respectively [76–78]). All parents of the evaluated fish (except eight SY sires) were genotyped with the HD chip [55], while offspring (and eight SY sires) were genotyped with a 57K chip [79]. The information used for phasing is in Table 1. Due to the lack of genotyped offspring, only the HD genotypes were used to phase the genotypes of the HA population.

Once phasing was performed, the rehh R package [80, 81] was used to conduct EHH-based analyses. Detection of EHH was stopped when the EHH value was lower than 0.1 or when the gap between two consecutive SNPs was larger than 20 kb (scan_hh function with the following options: limehh = 0.1; maxgap = 20 kb).

<table><caption>**Table 1** Numbers of individuals and SNPs available after quality control that were used to phase the HD genotypes of the females under study that belonged to parental cohorts</caption><thead><tr><th>Line</th><th>Status of the individuals</th><th>Number of individuals</th><th>Number of SNPs used</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">LB</td><td>Parents</td><td>288</td><td>571,319</td></tr><tr><td>Offspring</td><td>1297</td><td>29,091</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">LC</td><td>Parents</td><td>173</td><td>569,03</td></tr><tr><td>Offspring</td><td>1350</td><td>30,379</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">SY</td><td>Parents (dams + 1 sire)</td><td>16</td><td>569,03</td></tr><tr><td>Offspring (+ 8 sires)</td><td>866</td><td>32,725</td></tr></tbody></table>

## Cross-population extended haplotype homozygosity (XP-EHH)

From the EHH information, we used the XP-EHH statistics (ies2xpehh function) to compare the integrated EHH profiles (iES) between a French (popA) and the HA (popB) populations at a focal SNP [82] as:

$$XP\_EHH = \frac{\ln\left(\frac{iES_{popA}}{iES_{popB}}\right) - Med\left[\ln\left(\frac{iES_{popA}}{iES_{popB}}\right)\right]}{SD\left[\ln\left(\frac{iES_{popA}}{iES_{popB}}\right)\right]}$$

where Med is the median and SD is the standard deviation of $\frac{iES_{popA}}{iES_{popB}}$, which were computed across all analysed SNPs.

## Integrated haplotype homozygosity score (iHS)

We used the iHS test [74] to evaluate evidence of positive selection based on haplotype frequencies in a single population, using the ihh2ihs function of the package rehh. This statistic is based on the log-ratio of the integrated EHH (iHH) for haplotypes with the ancestral (A) versus the derived (D) alleles and was computed for each autosomal SNP as iHS = $\frac{\ln\left(\frac{iHH_A}{iHH_D}\right) - Mean_p\left[\ln\left(\frac{iHH_A}{iHH_D}\right)\right]}{SD_p\left[\ln\left(\frac{iHH_A}{iHH_D}\right)\right]}$, where Mean_p is the average and (SD_p is the standard deviation of $\ln\left(\frac{iHH_A}{iHH_D}\right)$, which were computed across all the SNPs with a derived allele frequency p similar to that of the focal SNP. Since the state of the ancestral allele was unknown in our study, we arbitrarily assumed that the most frequent allele represents the ancestral state, as proposed by Bahbahani et al. [83]. This assumption is likely valid for neutral loci or for loci with mutant alleles that are under negative selection compared to the common wild type alleles. However, for domesticated or selected populations, the ancestral state is expected to be the most frequent allele under positive selection. However, as the iHS values are normally distributed [83], a two-tailed Z-test was applied to identify statistically significant SNPs under selection with an extended haplotype of either the ancestral (positive iHS value) or the derived alleles (negative iHS value). We then arbitrarily considered that any extreme iHS absolute value (i.e. |iHS|≥ 2.5) corresponds to a positive signature of selection either for the ancestral allele (iHs > 0) or for the derived allele (iHs < 0).

## Detection of candidate regions

To detect candidate regions for signatures of selection based on the iHS test, we used the calc_candidates_region function of the R package rehh [80]. We considered sliding windows of 500 kb along the genome that contained at least 30 SNPs and that overlapped by 10 kb. A region
was considered to have been under positive selection if at least one SNP had a – log(p-value) > 4 and an extreme iHS value, i.e. |iHS|≥ 2.5.

## Identification of shared regions under positive selection

ROH islands and regions identified by iHS were pooled within each population and regions that were identified by either method for all four populations were identified. We eliminated regions for which one population did not have at least one SNP with an |iHS|≥ 2.5 or enough individuals with a ROH in the shared region. Thus, only regions that contained either ROH islands or an extreme iHS (|iHS|≥ 2.5) for each of the four populations were further analyzed.

## Gene analysis

Annotated genes in the regions under positive or balancing selection were identified from the NCBI *Oncorhynchus mykiss* genome assembly (GCA_013265735.3). Gene symbols were checked, and, if necessary, commonly used names were added using the information available from GeneCards (https://www.genecards.org/). A study of gene ontology (GO) terms was performed for the list of genes identified in the regions of interest using the 'g:profiler' web server ([84]; https://biit.cs.ut.ee/gprofiler/gost). The percent identity between corresponding proteins (of any annotated gene) for rainbow trout and nine other vertebrate species (human, mouse, cow, goat, pig, chicken, zebrafish, medaka, and Atlantic salmon) was established using the blastp tool (local alignment search tool on proteins in NCBI platform and protein alignments were obtained from NCBI).

## Results

### Genetic diversity within and across populations

The ROH statistics and inbreeding coefficients for the four populations are in Table 2. The average number of ROH per individual ranged from 141 (SY) to 168 (LB). The average size of the ROH was larger for the French selected lines than for the SY and HA populations. The average inbreeding coefficients of the HA individuals were between three (compared to SY) and five (compared

<table><caption>**Table 2** ROH statistics and inbreeding coefficients (F<sub>ROH</sub>) of the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th>Population</th><th>Average number of ROH</th><th>Average size of ROH (in kb)</th><th>Average F<sub>ROH</sub></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>LB</td><td>168 (14.6)</td><td>2770 (270.8)</td><td>0.20 (0.02)</td></tr><tr><td>LC</td><td>157 (15.9)</td><td>2485 (326.8)</td><td>0.17 (0.03)</td></tr><tr><td>SY</td><td>141 (33.5)</td><td>1860 (291.2)</td><td>0.12 (0.05)</td></tr><tr><td>HA</td><td>167 (65.6)</td><td>1433 (145.6)</td><td>0.04 (0.03)</td></tr></tbody></table>

Standard deviations are between brackets

to LB) times lower than those of the French lines. Within the pooled HA population, the average inbreeding coefficient was very low (F<sub>ROH</sub>=0.02) for the wild HA sub-population and ranged from 0.04 to 0.06 for the other HA sub-populations.

Based on genome-wide Fst, a large differentiation (~0.289) was observed between HA and any of the French populations (Table 3). In the PCA figure (Fig. 1), the three French lines were strongly differentiated from the American pooled populations, and the first two PCA axes explained 29% of the total genetic variation. In addition, Fst indicated that all the French lines were moderately differentiated (0.104 to 0.122). Among the five HA sub-populations, those from L. Quinault, Quinault, and Elwha river were very close to each other (0.01 < Fst < 0.03), while their genetic differentiation was larger, but weak, with fish from the Skamania hatchery (0.03 ≤ Fst ≤ 0.05). It is worth noting that fish from the Dworshak hatchery diverged the most from the others and not the group of wild fish (from the Elwha river) (see Additional file 1: Fig. S1b).

Using the XP-EHH statistics, we identified 93, 105, and 135 regions that strongly discriminated the HA from the LB, LC, and SY populations, respectively. Among these regions, 34 were shared, spanned about 32 Mb across 21 chromosomes, and differentiated all the French lines from the American HA pooled population (see Additional file 2: Table S1).

The distribution of the proportion of individuals having a ROH at each SNP position is in Fig. 2. On average, more ROH were shared between individuals within the selected lines (LB and LC, on average 23.4% and 19.8% of individuals, respectively) than for other populations (SY and HA, on average 13.7% and 8.9% of individuals, respectively). The HA population showed the smallest number of shared ROH among individuals, which is probably a result of its composite nature (5 sub-groups of 4 individuals), but it had also the largest number of individuals that shared a given ROH.

### Signatures of positive selection

#### ROH islands

We listed all ROH islands within each population and identified 270 ROH islands distributed among the four populations (see Additional file 2: Tables S2, S3, S4, and

<table><caption>**Table 3** Genome-wide Fst between the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>LC</th><th>LB</th><th>HA</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>SY</td><td>0.104</td><td>0.122</td><td>0.275</td></tr><tr><td>LC</td><td></td><td>0.121</td><td>0.274</td></tr><tr><td>LB</td><td></td><td></td><td>0.289</td></tr></tbody></table>
was considered to have been under positive selection if at least one SNP had a – log(p-value) > 4 and an extreme iHS value, i.e. |iHS|≥ 2.5.

## Identification of shared regions under positive selection

ROH islands and regions identified by iHS were pooled within each population and regions that were identified by either method for all four populations were identified. We eliminated regions for which one population did not have at least one SNP with an |iHS|≥ 2.5 or enough individuals with a ROH in the shared region. Thus, only regions that contained either ROH islands or an extreme iHS (|iHS|≥ 2.5) for each of the four populations were further analyzed.

## Gene analysis

Annotated genes in the regions under positive or balancing selection were identified from the NCBI *Oncorhynchus mykiss* genome assembly (GCA_013265735.3). Gene symbols were checked, and, if necessary, commonly used names were added using the information available from GeneCards (https://www.genecards.org/). A study of gene ontology (GO) terms was performed for the list of genes identified in the regions of interest using the 'g:profiler' web server ([84]; https://biit.cs.ut.ee/gprofiler/gost). The percent identity between corresponding proteins (of any annotated gene) for rainbow trout and nine other vertebrate species (human, mouse, cow, goat, pig, chicken, zebrafish, medaka, and Atlantic salmon) was established using the blastp tool (local alignment search tool on proteins in NCBI platform and protein alignments were obtained from NCBI).

## Results

### Genetic diversity within and across populations

The ROH statistics and inbreeding coefficients for the four populations are in Table 2. The average number of ROH per individual ranged from 141 (SY) to 168 (LB). The average size of the ROH was larger for the French selected lines than for the SY and HA populations. The average inbreeding coefficients of the HA individuals were between three (compared to SY) and five (compared

<table><caption>**Table 2** ROH statistics and inbreeding coefficients (F<sub>ROH</sub>) of the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th>Population</th><th>Average number of ROH</th><th>Average size of ROH (in kb)</th><th>Average F<sub>ROH</sub></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>LB</td><td>168 (14.6)</td><td>2770 (270.8)</td><td>0.20 (0.02)</td></tr><tr><td>LC</td><td>157 (15.9)</td><td>2485 (326.8)</td><td>0.17 (0.03)</td></tr><tr><td>SY</td><td>141 (33.5)</td><td>1860 (291.2)</td><td>0.12 (0.05)</td></tr><tr><td>HA</td><td>167 (65.6)</td><td>1433 (145.6)</td><td>0.04 (0.03)</td></tr></tbody></table>

Standard deviations are between brackets

to LB) times lower than those of the French lines. Within the pooled HA population, the average inbreeding coefficient was very low (F<sub>ROH</sub>=0.02) for the wild HA sub-population and ranged from 0.04 to 0.06 for the other HA sub-populations.

Based on genome-wide Fst, a large differentiation (~0.289) was observed between HA and any of the French populations (Table 3). In the PCA figure (Fig. 1), the three French lines were strongly differentiated from the American pooled populations, and the first two PCA axes explained 29% of the total genetic variation. In addition, Fst indicated that all the French lines were moderately differentiated (0.104 to 0.122). Among the five HA sub-populations, those from L. Quinault, Quinault, and Elwha river were very close to each other (0.01 < Fst < 0.03), while their genetic differentiation was larger, but weak, with fish from the Skamania hatchery (0.03 ≤ Fst ≤ 0.05). It is worth noting that fish from the Dworshak hatchery diverged the most from the others and not the group of wild fish (from the Elwha river) (see Additional file 1: Fig. S1b).

Using the XP-EHH statistics, we identified 93, 105, and 135 regions that strongly discriminated the HA from the LB, LC, and SY populations, respectively. Among these regions, 34 were shared, spanned about 32 Mb across 21 chromosomes, and differentiated all the French lines from the American HA pooled population (see Additional file 2: Table S1).

The distribution of the proportion of individuals having a ROH at each SNP position is in Fig. 2. On average, more ROH were shared between individuals within the selected lines (LB and LC, on average 23.4% and 19.8% of individuals, respectively) than for other populations (SY and HA, on average 13.7% and 8.9% of individuals, respectively). The HA population showed the smallest number of shared ROH among individuals, which is probably a result of its composite nature (5 sub-groups of 4 individuals), but it had also the largest number of individuals that shared a given ROH.

### Signatures of positive selection

#### ROH islands

We listed all ROH islands within each population and identified 270 ROH islands distributed among the four populations (see Additional file 2: Tables S2, S3, S4, and

<table><caption>**Table 3** Genome-wide Fst between the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>LC</th><th>LB</th><th>HA</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>SY</td><td>0.104</td><td>0.122</td><td>0.275</td></tr><tr><td>LC</td><td></td><td>0.121</td><td>0.274</td></tr><tr><td>LB</td><td></td><td></td><td>0.289</td></tr></tbody></table>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2** Box-plots of the occurrence of ROH (number of individuals with this ROH) per SNP for the four rainbow trout populations, LB, LC, SY, and HA</figcaption></figure>

S5 for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively). The ROH islands were not evenly distributed across populations and chromosomes. The average ROH island size was 2737 kb, ranging from 1593 to 4465 kb, depending on the population. The longest (21.4 Mb) and shortest (16.1 kb) ROH islands were observed for the SY and LC populations, respectively.

The shared ROH among individuals are presented in Fig. 3. Eight ROH islands were shared by at least two populations, with a minimum of 50% individuals involved for each population. However, only three of these regions with ROH were defined as ROH islands in all four populations.

## Signatures of selection based on iHS

The – log(p-values) of the iHS calculated across the genome are presented in Fig. 4 for each population (all regions identified with *calc-candidate_region* are described in Additional file 2: Tables S6, S7, S8 and S9. The genome-wide highest estimates of |iHS| were 8.97, 7.24, 5.67, and 9.09 for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively (with – log(p-values) > 7.8). While numerous regions were identified to be under positive selection overall, fewer such regions were identified for the French lines (LB, LC and, SY) than for the American pooled population (HA). This may be the result of the pooled origins of the HA population which can produce false positive signatures of selection. Because our objective was not to detect signatures of selection

within populations but across populations, the shared signatures of selection are expected to be robust to any bias that could be due to the structure of the HA population.

In total, 72, 68, 76, and 54 ROH islands were identified for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively (Fig. 5). Using iHS statistics, 55, 69, 73, and 362 signatures of selection were detected for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively. Only 10.4, 8.7, 8.0, and 5.6% of the regions were detected by both methods (ROH and iHS) for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively.

## Regions under positive selection shared by the four populations

Among the numerous regions identified for each population by either the ROH or the iHS method, only nine regions were shared by the four populations (Table 4). The average size of these shared regions was 1135 kb. Among these nine regions, five were located on chromosome 2, and the other four were on chromosomes 12, 15, 16, and 20.

Two regions, chr2_c and chr15_a (Table 4), were detected only based on the ROH analysis in each population, while chr16_a was identified only based on the significant iHS statistics in each population (see Additional file 2: Table S10). The list of genes annotated in the nine shared genomic regions is in Additional file 2 Table S11.
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2** Box-plots of the occurrence of ROH (number of individuals with this ROH) per SNP for the four rainbow trout populations, LB, LC, SY, and HA</figcaption></figure>

S5 for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively). The ROH islands were not evenly distributed across populations and chromosomes. The average ROH island size was 2737 kb, ranging from 1593 to 4465 kb, depending on the population. The longest (21.4 Mb) and shortest (16.1 kb) ROH islands were observed for the SY and LC populations, respectively.

The shared ROH among individuals are presented in Fig. 3. Eight ROH islands were shared by at least two populations, with a minimum of 50% individuals involved for each population. However, only three of these regions with ROH were defined as ROH islands in all four populations.

## Signatures of selection based on iHS

The – log(p-values) of the iHS calculated across the genome are presented in Fig. 4 for each population (all regions identified with *calc-candidate_region* are described in Additional file 2: Tables S6, S7, S8 and S9. The genome-wide highest estimates of |iHS| were 8.97, 7.24, 5.67, and 9.09 for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively (with – log(p-values) > 7.8). While numerous regions were identified to be under positive selection overall, fewer such regions were identified for the French lines (LB, LC and, SY) than for the American pooled population (HA). This may be the result of the pooled origins of the HA population which can produce false positive signatures of selection. Because our objective was not to detect signatures of selection

within populations but across populations, the shared signatures of selection are expected to be robust to any bias that could be due to the structure of the HA population.

In total, 72, 68, 76, and 54 ROH islands were identified for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively (Fig. 5). Using iHS statistics, 55, 69, 73, and 362 signatures of selection were detected for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively. Only 10.4, 8.7, 8.0, and 5.6% of the regions were detected by both methods (ROH and iHS) for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively.

## Regions under positive selection shared by the four populations

Among the numerous regions identified for each population by either the ROH or the iHS method, only nine regions were shared by the four populations (Table 4). The average size of these shared regions was 1135 kb. Among these nine regions, five were located on chromosome 2, and the other four were on chromosomes 12, 15, 16, and 20.

Two regions, chr2_c and chr15_a (Table 4), were detected only based on the ROH analysis in each population, while chr16_a was identified only based on the significant iHS statistics in each population (see Additional file 2: Table S10). The list of genes annotated in the nine shared genomic regions is in Additional file 2 Table S11.
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 3** Manhattan plot of the occurrence of ROH per SNP across chromosomes (across the four rainbow trout populations). The red line corresponds to the threshold of 50% selected to consider a region as a ROH island</figcaption></figure>

## Signatures of balancing selection

### Regions under balancing selection detected within population

In total, 14, 24, 158, and 265 hotspots of polymorphism (i.e. without ROH) were identified for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively. The numbers of heterozygous regions detected were substantially larger for the SY and HA populations than for the selected lines LB and LC. The average size of the detected heterozygous regions was 1400 kb, ranging from 1086 to 1828 kb, depending on the population. Additional file 2: Tables S13 to S16 list all heterozygous regions within each population.

### Regions under balancing selection shared by the four populations

A substantial lack of ROH was observed for each population (Table 5) in four regions. Two of these regions, chr10_a and chr19_a (Table 5), were particularly small (53 kb and 70 kb, respectively), but still contained at least 20 SNPs. The chr10_a region encodes one of the introns of the *ctnna2* (*catenin alpha 2*) gene, while the chr19_a region covered two genes, *smarca5* (*SWI/SNF-related matrix-associated actin-dependent regulator of chromatin subfamily A member 5*) and *frem2* (*FRAS1-related extracellular matrix protein 2*). A second heterozygous region on chromosome 19 was larger (163 kb) and

contained one annotated gene *pou4f2* (*POU domain, class 4, transcription factor 2-like*). The fourth region, chr13_a, spanned over 1100 kb on chromosome 13 and included 25 genes. The list of genes annotated in the four shared genomic regions is in Additional file 2: Table S17.

## Identification and role of the genes in the regions under selection across all populations

### Homozygous regions under positive selection shared by the four populations

The nine homozygous regions that were common to the four populations contained 253 genes (see Additional file 2: Table S11). The GO study showed significant over-representation (*p-value* < 0.01) of genes with functions related to the following GO terms: membrane (GO:0016020, CC: cellular component, *p-value*=1.3e10⁻⁵), intrinsic and integral component of membrane (GO:0031224; GO:0016021, CC, *p-value*=0.001/0.005), ion binding (GO:0043167, MF: molecular function, *p-value*=0.002), and nuclear speck (GO:0016607, CC, *p-value*=0.008).

Among these nine regions, the regions chr2_a, chr2_c, and chr15_a, which each contained less than 10 annotated genes, were analyzed in further detail to accurately define the roles of these genes. The 17 genes located in these three regions are listed in Additional
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 3** Manhattan plot of the occurrence of ROH per SNP across chromosomes (across the four rainbow trout populations). The red line corresponds to the threshold of 50% selected to consider a region as a ROH island</figcaption></figure>

## Signatures of balancing selection

### Regions under balancing selection detected within population

In total, 14, 24, 158, and 265 hotspots of polymorphism (i.e. without ROH) were identified for the LB, LC, SY, and HA populations, respectively. The numbers of heterozygous regions detected were substantially larger for the SY and HA populations than for the selected lines LB and LC. The average size of the detected heterozygous regions was 1400 kb, ranging from 1086 to 1828 kb, depending on the population. Additional file 2: Tables S13 to S16 list all heterozygous regions within each population.

### Regions under balancing selection shared by the four populations

A substantial lack of ROH was observed for each population (Table 5) in four regions. Two of these regions, chr10_a and chr19_a (Table 5), were particularly small (53 kb and 70 kb, respectively), but still contained at least 20 SNPs. The chr10_a region encodes one of the introns of the *ctnna2* (*catenin alpha 2*) gene, while the chr19_a region covered two genes, *smarca5* (*SWI/SNF-related matrix-associated actin-dependent regulator of chromatin subfamily A member 5*) and *frem2* (*FRAS1-related extracellular matrix protein 2*). A second heterozygous region on chromosome 19 was larger (163 kb) and

contained one annotated gene *pou4f2* (*POU domain, class 4, transcription factor 2-like*). The fourth region, chr13_a, spanned over 1100 kb on chromosome 13 and included 25 genes. The list of genes annotated in the four shared genomic regions is in Additional file 2: Table S17.

## Identification and role of the genes in the regions under selection across all populations

### Homozygous regions under positive selection shared by the four populations

The nine homozygous regions that were common to the four populations contained 253 genes (see Additional file 2: Table S11). The GO study showed significant over-representation (*p-value* < 0.01) of genes with functions related to the following GO terms: membrane (GO:0016020, CC: cellular component, *p-value*=1.3e10⁻⁵), intrinsic and integral component of membrane (GO:0031224; GO:0016021, CC, *p-value*=0.001/0.005), ion binding (GO:0043167, MF: molecular function, *p-value*=0.002), and nuclear speck (GO:0016607, CC, *p-value*=0.008).

Among these nine regions, the regions chr2_a, chr2_c, and chr15_a, which each contained less than 10 annotated genes, were analyzed in further detail to accurately define the roles of these genes. The 17 genes located in these three regions are listed in Additional
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 4** Genome-wide distribution of -log(p-value) for standardized iHS for each of the four rainbow trout populations (LB, LC, SY, HA). The dashed line indicates the -log(p-value) significance threshold set to 4 to identify regions under positive selection</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 4** Genome-wide distribution of -log(p-value) for standardized iHS for each of the four rainbow trout populations (LB, LC, SY, HA). The dashed line indicates the -log(p-value) significance threshold set to 4 to identify regions under positive selection</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 5** Venn diagram of the number of regions identified as ROH island or iHS signatures of selection for each of the four rainbow trout populations</figcaption></figure>

<table><caption>**Table 4** Homozygous regions under positive selection in the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th>Region</th><th>CHR</th><th>Start (Mb)</th><th>End (Mb)</th><th>Size (kb)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>chr2_a</td><td>2</td><td>25.40</td><td>26.30</td><td>900</td></tr><tr><td>chr2_b</td><td>2</td><td>31.60</td><td>34.20</td><td>2600</td></tr><tr><td>chr2_c</td><td>2</td><td>46.00</td><td>46.66</td><td>664</td></tr><tr><td>chr2_d</td><td>2</td><td>69.70</td><td>71.20</td><td>1500</td></tr><tr><td>chr2_e</td><td>2</td><td>88.46</td><td>89.34</td><td>878</td></tr><tr><td>chr12_a</td><td>12</td><td>57.97</td><td>59.10</td><td>1138</td></tr><tr><td>chr15_a</td><td>15</td><td>38.96</td><td>39.57</td><td>610</td></tr><tr><td>chr16_a</td><td>16</td><td>45.80</td><td>47.00</td><td>1200</td></tr><tr><td>chr20_a</td><td>20</td><td>19.10</td><td>19.83</td><td>726</td></tr></tbody></table>

file 2: Table S12, with their associated biological functions that play key roles in protein transduction/maturity, genome stability, embryonic development, growth, energetic function, reproduction, or immune function [85–114]. Detailed information for 15 genes in six other homozygous regions that were previously identified as signatures of selection [30, 33, 38, 40, 65, 115–122] is also provided in Additional file 2: Table S12.

We estimated the degree of protein identity among 10 vertebrate species for the 17 genes in the chr2_a, chr2_c, and chr15_a regions (Table 6), considering a protein as highly conserved if its identity between rainbow trout and other species was higher than 85%. Except for the proteins encoded by the *cep162* (centrosomal protein of 162 kDa) and *zp4* (zona pellucida sperm-binding protein

4-like) genes, all the other proteins were at least highly conserved between the two studied salmonids.

In each of the three regions, one or two genes were highly conserved across the 10 studied species. For the chr2_a region, the protein encoded by the rainbow trout *cdk14* (cyclin-dependent kinase 14) gene had a percent identity between 86 and 99.6% with the other species; for the chr2_c region, the protein encoded by the rainbow trout *brsk2a* (serine/threonine-protein kinase brsk2) gene had between 92 and 96.3% identity with the other species; and for the chr15_a region, the proteins encoded by the two *chn1*(*n*-chimaerin) and *atp5mc1* (ATP synthase lipid-binding protein, mitochondrial) genes also had a protein percent identity ranging from 85 to 98% depending on the species.

Two other rainbow trout proteins encoded by the *tsnare1* (*t*-SNARE domain-containing protein 1) and *ptt-g1IP* (pituitary tumor-transforming gene 1 protein-interacting protein) genes were conserved to a lesser extent (minimum 65% identity) with the three other fish species, several were also conserved at least with chicken *adgrb1* (*adhesion G protein-coupled receptor B1*), *b4galnt4a* (*N*-acetyl-beta-glucosaminyl-glycoprotein 4-beta-*N*-acetylgalactosaminyltransferase 1) or even with all nine studied species *zc3h15* (*zinc finger CCCH domain-containing protein 15*).

**Heterozygous regions under balancing selection shared by the four populations**

The four heterozygous regions (Table 5) that were common to the four populations contained 29 genes (see

<table><caption>**Table 5** Highly heterozygous regions shared by the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th>Region</th><th>CHR</th><th>Start (Mb)</th><th>End (Mb)</th><th>Size (kb)</th><th>SNP number</th><th>SNP density per Mb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>chr10_a</td><td>10</td><td>56.314</td><td>56.366</td><td>53</td><td>20</td><td>379</td></tr><tr><td>chr13_a</td><td>13</td><td>46.959</td><td>48.071</td><td>1112</td><td>446</td><td>401</td></tr><tr><td>chr19_a</td><td>19</td><td>10.753</td><td>10.823</td><td>70</td><td>24</td><td>342</td></tr><tr><td>chr19_b</td><td>19</td><td>11.354</td><td>11.517</td><td>163</td><td>52</td><td>319</td></tr></tbody></table>
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 5** Venn diagram of the number of regions identified as ROH island or iHS signatures of selection for each of the four rainbow trout populations</figcaption></figure>

<table><caption>**Table 4** Homozygous regions under positive selection in the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th>Region</th><th>CHR</th><th>Start (Mb)</th><th>End (Mb)</th><th>Size (kb)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>chr2_a</td><td>2</td><td>25.40</td><td>26.30</td><td>900</td></tr><tr><td>chr2_b</td><td>2</td><td>31.60</td><td>34.20</td><td>2600</td></tr><tr><td>chr2_c</td><td>2</td><td>46.00</td><td>46.66</td><td>664</td></tr><tr><td>chr2_d</td><td>2</td><td>69.70</td><td>71.20</td><td>1500</td></tr><tr><td>chr2_e</td><td>2</td><td>88.46</td><td>89.34</td><td>878</td></tr><tr><td>chr12_a</td><td>12</td><td>57.97</td><td>59.10</td><td>1138</td></tr><tr><td>chr15_a</td><td>15</td><td>38.96</td><td>39.57</td><td>610</td></tr><tr><td>chr16_a</td><td>16</td><td>45.80</td><td>47.00</td><td>1200</td></tr><tr><td>chr20_a</td><td>20</td><td>19.10</td><td>19.83</td><td>726</td></tr></tbody></table>

file 2: Table S12, with their associated biological functions that play key roles in protein transduction/maturity, genome stability, embryonic development, growth, energetic function, reproduction, or immune function [85–114]. Detailed information for 15 genes in six other homozygous regions that were previously identified as signatures of selection [30, 33, 38, 40, 65, 115–122] is also provided in Additional file 2: Table S12.

We estimated the degree of protein identity among 10 vertebrate species for the 17 genes in the chr2_a, chr2_c, and chr15_a regions (Table 6), considering a protein as highly conserved if its identity between rainbow trout and other species was higher than 85%. Except for the proteins encoded by the *cep162* (centrosomal protein of 162 kDa) and *zp4* (zona pellucida sperm-binding protein

4-like) genes, all the other proteins were at least highly conserved between the two studied salmonids.

In each of the three regions, one or two genes were highly conserved across the 10 studied species. For the chr2_a region, the protein encoded by the rainbow trout *cdk14* (cyclin-dependent kinase 14) gene had a percent identity between 86 and 99.6% with the other species; for the chr2_c region, the protein encoded by the rainbow trout *brsk2a* (serine/threonine-protein kinase brsk2) gene had between 92 and 96.3% identity with the other species; and for the chr15_a region, the proteins encoded by the two *chn1*(*n*-chimaerin) and *atp5mc1* (ATP synthase lipid-binding protein, mitochondrial) genes also had a protein percent identity ranging from 85 to 98% depending on the species.

Two other rainbow trout proteins encoded by the *tsnare1* (*t*-SNARE domain-containing protein 1) and *ptt-g1IP* (pituitary tumor-transforming gene 1 protein-interacting protein) genes were conserved to a lesser extent (minimum 65% identity) with the three other fish species, several were also conserved at least with chicken *adgrb1* (*adhesion G protein-coupled receptor B1*), *b4galnt4a* (*N*-acetyl-beta-glucosaminyl-glycoprotein 4-beta-*N*-acetylgalactosaminyltransferase 1) or even with all nine studied species *zc3h15* (*zinc finger CCCH domain-containing protein 15*).

**Heterozygous regions under balancing selection shared by the four populations**

The four heterozygous regions (Table 5) that were common to the four populations contained 29 genes (see

<table><caption>**Table 5** Highly heterozygous regions shared by the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th>Region</th><th>CHR</th><th>Start (Mb)</th><th>End (Mb)</th><th>Size (kb)</th><th>SNP number</th><th>SNP density per Mb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>chr10_a</td><td>10</td><td>56.314</td><td>56.366</td><td>53</td><td>20</td><td>379</td></tr><tr><td>chr13_a</td><td>13</td><td>46.959</td><td>48.071</td><td>1112</td><td>446</td><td>401</td></tr><tr><td>chr19_a</td><td>19</td><td>10.753</td><td>10.823</td><td>70</td><td>24</td><td>342</td></tr><tr><td>chr19_b</td><td>19</td><td>11.354</td><td>11.517</td><td>163</td><td>52</td><td>319</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Table 6** Percentage of protein identity between rainbow trout and nine other vertebrate species for all the genes annotated in the homozygous regions chr2_a, chr2_c and chr15_a</caption><thead><tr><th>Region</th><th>gene_ID</th><th>Human</th><th>Mouse</th><th>Goat</th><th>Cattle</th><th>Pig</th><th>Chicken</th><th>Zebrafish</th><th>Medaka</th><th>Atlantic salmon</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="6">chr2_a</td><td>mrap2a</td><td>45.71</td><td>43.52</td><td>43.87</td><td>44.98</td><td>45.45</td><td>42.20</td><td>56.22</td><td>50.45</td><td>87.55</td></tr><tr><td>cep162</td><td>36.61</td><td>37.50</td><td>40.95</td><td>40.95</td><td>50.00</td><td>53.73</td><td>38.61</td><td>62.50</td><td>80.66</td></tr><tr><td>adgrb1</td><td>62.37</td><td>63.44</td><td>62.12</td><td>61.95</td><td>61.74</td><td>67.72</td><td>84.02</td><td>80.94</td><td>98.16</td></tr><tr><td>tsnare1</td><td>54.78</td><td>31.50</td><td>56.99</td><td>55.79</td><td>56.02</td><td>60.74</td><td>85.62</td><td>78.55</td><td>98.29</td></tr><tr><td>pttg1IP</td><td>60.00</td><td>57.89</td><td>57.04</td><td>57.04</td><td>58.82</td><td>59.74</td><td>70.92</td><td>66.03</td><td>93.89</td></tr><tr><td>cdk14</td><td>87.05</td><td>87.05</td><td>86.44</td><td>86.02</td><td>85.99</td><td>87.24</td><td>88.96</td><td>91.08</td><td>99.58</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">chr2_c</td><td>brsk2a</td><td>92.12</td><td>92.50</td><td>92.66</td><td>92.19</td><td>92.66</td><td>93.82</td><td>96.14</td><td>92.05</td><td>96.26</td></tr><tr><td>abtb2b</td><td>71.54</td><td>70.76</td><td>71.93</td><td>71.74</td><td>71.74</td><td>72.46</td><td>81.05</td><td>61.68</td><td>97.35</td></tr><tr><td>b4galnt4a</td><td>63.35</td><td>65.38</td><td>57.14</td><td>64.63</td><td>64.95</td><td>66.37</td><td>66.06</td><td>79.96</td><td>96.55</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">chr15_a</td><td>chn1</td><td>88.80</td><td>86.59</td><td>88.04</td><td>87.32</td><td>88.04</td><td>88.10</td><td>85.29</td><td>85.01</td><td>98.04</td></tr><tr><td>atp5mc1</td><td>97.37</td><td>87.10</td><td>91.76</td><td>94.44</td><td>93.33</td><td>86.17</td><td>91.30</td><td>97.87</td><td>94.12</td></tr><tr><td>zc3h15</td><td>69.35</td><td>68.57</td><td>67.55</td><td>67.55</td><td>67.55</td><td>66.90</td><td>74.33</td><td>71.57</td><td>97.30</td></tr><tr><td>zp4</td><td>29.67</td><td>29.61</td><td>31.87</td><td>37.47</td><td>30.21</td><td>31.46</td><td>45.60</td><td>49.74</td><td>74.74</td></tr><tr><td>nid2</td><td>52.00</td><td>51.16</td><td>51.11</td><td>51.11</td><td>51.22</td><td>55.00</td><td>58.14</td><td>52.78</td><td>97.87</td></tr><tr><td>brca2</td><td>46.24</td><td>43.72</td><td>37.12</td><td>32.42</td><td>45.61</td><td>45.85</td><td>38.68</td><td>54.08</td><td>92.05</td></tr></tbody></table>

Additional file 1: Table S17). A study of GO terms showed no significant over-representation of specific GO terms. The degrees of protein % identity among the 10 vertebrate species for these 29 genes are in Additional file 2: Table S18.

The three regions chr10_a, chr19_a, and chr19_b contained only a few genes and their analysis (Table 7) did not show any key roles in cellular and nuclear organisation and in embryonic development.

## Discussion

The objective of our study was to detect signatures of selection in domestic rainbow trout. To reach that goal, we studied four genetically distinct populations that were sampled from different locations in France and in the North-West of the USA. Using two approaches, ROH and EHH, and genotypes from the 665K SNP array, we detected nine very conserved regions and four hotspots of polymorphism, which included 253 and 29 annotated genes, respectively.

## Quality of the 665 K SNP array

This HD array has been carefully designed to filter out putatively duplicate markers [55] that are due to the complexity of the rainbow trout genome, which results from the fourth whole-genome duplication event that occurred about 96 Mya [131], leading to only partial rediploidization, and patterns of tetrasomic inheritance [132]. These phenomena may explain the difficulties to sequence and assemble some parts of the rainbow trout genome and thus to detect SNPs. Although the 665K SNP chip was designed based on the Swanson reference

genome [132], only the 576K SNPs that were uniquely positioned on the Arlee reference genome [60] were considered in our study. A large gap of 2.75 Mb between two subsequent SNPs on the HD array is present at the end of the *Oncorhynchus mykiss* (Omy) chromosome 13 on the Arlee reference genome [55]. This gap is likely due to the fact that Omy13 shares a high level of sequence homology with other chromosome arms due to delay in re-diploidization [58]. The large (> 1.1 Mb) heterozygous region that we identified on the q arm of Omy13 was not located in the telomeric region, but rather 10 Mb towards the centromere in a region that shares homology with the q arm of Omy12, based on the Swanson reference assembly [132]. A high percent identity between chromosome arms can lead to chimerism or assembly collapse, which can give an appearance of excess heterozygosity if not detected. We hypothesize that the new Arlee reference genome assembly allowed us to identify variants from those two homolog regions without ambiguity. For the same reason, it is also important to note that the regions identified as very heterozygous in the centromeric region of Omy10 and on the p arm of Omy12 are highly homologous regions [132].

## Genetic structure

In the Results section, we first described the genetic structure of the studied populations. The three French lines were moderately differentiated, with Fst ranging from 0.10 to 0.12, consistent with estimates by D'Ambrosio et al. [59], which ranged from 0.09 to 0.14 for the same populations but using a 57K SNP array. These moderate differences between the three French
<table><caption>**Table 6** Percentage of protein identity between rainbow trout and nine other vertebrate species for all the genes annotated in the homozygous regions chr2_a, chr2_c and chr15_a</caption><thead><tr><th>Region</th><th>gene_ID</th><th>Human</th><th>Mouse</th><th>Goat</th><th>Cattle</th><th>Pig</th><th>Chicken</th><th>Zebrafish</th><th>Medaka</th><th>Atlantic salmon</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="6">chr2_a</td><td>mrap2a</td><td>45.71</td><td>43.52</td><td>43.87</td><td>44.98</td><td>45.45</td><td>42.20</td><td>56.22</td><td>50.45</td><td>87.55</td></tr><tr><td>cep162</td><td>36.61</td><td>37.50</td><td>40.95</td><td>40.95</td><td>50.00</td><td>53.73</td><td>38.61</td><td>62.50</td><td>80.66</td></tr><tr><td>adgrb1</td><td>62.37</td><td>63.44</td><td>62.12</td><td>61.95</td><td>61.74</td><td>67.72</td><td>84.02</td><td>80.94</td><td>98.16</td></tr><tr><td>tsnare1</td><td>54.78</td><td>31.50</td><td>56.99</td><td>55.79</td><td>56.02</td><td>60.74</td><td>85.62</td><td>78.55</td><td>98.29</td></tr><tr><td>pttg1IP</td><td>60.00</td><td>57.89</td><td>57.04</td><td>57.04</td><td>58.82</td><td>59.74</td><td>70.92</td><td>66.03</td><td>93.89</td></tr><tr><td>cdk14</td><td>87.05</td><td>87.05</td><td>86.44</td><td>86.02</td><td>85.99</td><td>87.24</td><td>88.96</td><td>91.08</td><td>99.58</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">chr2_c</td><td>brsk2a</td><td>92.12</td><td>92.50</td><td>92.66</td><td>92.19</td><td>92.66</td><td>93.82</td><td>96.14</td><td>92.05</td><td>96.26</td></tr><tr><td>abtb2b</td><td>71.54</td><td>70.76</td><td>71.93</td><td>71.74</td><td>71.74</td><td>72.46</td><td>81.05</td><td>61.68</td><td>97.35</td></tr><tr><td>b4galnt4a</td><td>63.35</td><td>65.38</td><td>57.14</td><td>64.63</td><td>64.95</td><td>66.37</td><td>66.06</td><td>79.96</td><td>96.55</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">chr15_a</td><td>chn1</td><td>88.80</td><td>86.59</td><td>88.04</td><td>87.32</td><td>88.04</td><td>88.10</td><td>85.29</td><td>85.01</td><td>98.04</td></tr><tr><td>atp5mc1</td><td>97.37</td><td>87.10</td><td>91.76</td><td>94.44</td><td>93.33</td><td>86.17</td><td>91.30</td><td>97.87</td><td>94.12</td></tr><tr><td>zc3h15</td><td>69.35</td><td>68.57</td><td>67.55</td><td>67.55</td><td>67.55</td><td>66.90</td><td>74.33</td><td>71.57</td><td>97.30</td></tr><tr><td>zp4</td><td>29.67</td><td>29.61</td><td>31.87</td><td>37.47</td><td>30.21</td><td>31.46</td><td>45.60</td><td>49.74</td><td>74.74</td></tr><tr><td>nid2</td><td>52.00</td><td>51.16</td><td>51.11</td><td>51.11</td><td>51.22</td><td>55.00</td><td>58.14</td><td>52.78</td><td>97.87</td></tr><tr><td>brca2</td><td>46.24</td><td>43.72</td><td>37.12</td><td>32.42</td><td>45.61</td><td>45.85</td><td>38.68</td><td>54.08</td><td>92.05</td></tr></tbody></table>

Additional file 1: Table S17). A study of GO terms showed no significant over-representation of specific GO terms. The degrees of protein % identity among the 10 vertebrate species for these 29 genes are in Additional file 2: Table S18.

The three regions chr10_a, chr19_a, and chr19_b contained only a few genes and their analysis (Table 7) did not show any key roles in cellular and nuclear organisation and in embryonic development.

## Discussion

The objective of our study was to detect signatures of selection in domestic rainbow trout. To reach that goal, we studied four genetically distinct populations that were sampled from different locations in France and in the North-West of the USA. Using two approaches, ROH and EHH, and genotypes from the 665K SNP array, we detected nine very conserved regions and four hotspots of polymorphism, which included 253 and 29 annotated genes, respectively.

## Quality of the 665 K SNP array

This HD array has been carefully designed to filter out putatively duplicate markers [55] that are due to the complexity of the rainbow trout genome, which results from the fourth whole-genome duplication event that occurred about 96 Mya [131], leading to only partial rediploidization, and patterns of tetrasomic inheritance [132]. These phenomena may explain the difficulties to sequence and assemble some parts of the rainbow trout genome and thus to detect SNPs. Although the 665K SNP chip was designed based on the Swanson reference

genome [132], only the 576K SNPs that were uniquely positioned on the Arlee reference genome [60] were considered in our study. A large gap of 2.75 Mb between two subsequent SNPs on the HD array is present at the end of the *Oncorhynchus mykiss* (Omy) chromosome 13 on the Arlee reference genome [55]. This gap is likely due to the fact that Omy13 shares a high level of sequence homology with other chromosome arms due to delay in re-diploidization [58]. The large (> 1.1 Mb) heterozygous region that we identified on the q arm of Omy13 was not located in the telomeric region, but rather 10 Mb towards the centromere in a region that shares homology with the q arm of Omy12, based on the Swanson reference assembly [132]. A high percent identity between chromosome arms can lead to chimerism or assembly collapse, which can give an appearance of excess heterozygosity if not detected. We hypothesize that the new Arlee reference genome assembly allowed us to identify variants from those two homolog regions without ambiguity. For the same reason, it is also important to note that the regions identified as very heterozygous in the centromeric region of Omy10 and on the p arm of Omy12 are highly homologous regions [132].

## Genetic structure

In the Results section, we first described the genetic structure of the studied populations. The three French lines were moderately differentiated, with Fst ranging from 0.10 to 0.12, consistent with estimates by D'Ambrosio et al. [59], which ranged from 0.09 to 0.14 for the same populations but using a 57K SNP array. These moderate differences between the three French
<table><caption>**Table 7** List and functions of the four genes annotated in three heterozygous regions (chr10_a, chr19_a, and chr19_b) shared by the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th>Region</th><th>Gene name</th><th>Protein name</th><th>General function</th><th>References</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>chr10_a</td><td>ctnna2</td><td>catenin alpha 2</td><td>Enables actin filament binding activity, and involved in negative regulation of Arp2/3 complex-mediated actin nucleation. Regulation of neuron migration and of neuron projection development. Implicated in brain malformations. Seems implicated in vertebral development(/deformities) in Yunlong grouper</td><td>[123] vertebrates; [124] Yunlong grouper</td></tr><tr><td>chr19_a</td><td>smarca5</td><td>SWI/SNF-related matrix-associated actin-dependent regulator of chromatin subfamily A member 5</td><td>The protein encoded by this gene is a member of the SWI/SNF family of proteins. Members of this family have helicase and ATPase activities and are thought to regulate transcription of certain genes by altering the chromatin structure around those genes. The protein encoded by this gene is a component of the chromatin remodeling and spacing factor RSF, a facilitator of the transcription of class II genes by RNA polymerase II</td><td>[125] zebrafish; [126] mice; [127] zebrafish</td></tr><tr><td>frem2</td><td>FRAS1-related extracellular matrix protein 2</td><td></td><td>Plays a role in epidermal-dermal interactions—> important for the integrity of skin and renal epithelia</td><td>[128] zebrafish</td></tr><tr><td>chr19_b</td><td>pou4f2</td><td>POU domain, class 4, transcription factor 2-like</td><td>May be involved in maintaining visual system neurons in the retina, and in the lateral line. The level of the encoded protein is also elevated in a majority of breast cancers, resulting in accelerated tumor growth. Seems link to cardiac development in zerafish</td><td>[129] zebrafish; [130] zebrafish</td></tr></tbody></table>

populations were consistent with the PCA that we performed and the history of these populations with a partially common INRAE origin [59]. This trend is shared between European farmed populations with, e.g., an average Fst of 0.13 between 12 European rainbow trout strains [133]. Similarly, US farmed rainbow trout populations are also weakly to moderately differentiated, with an average Fst of 0.09 [134] or 0.13 [135] and pairwise Fst ranging from 0.06 to 0.16. We observed a similar pattern in the present study, with individuals from the HA population, which consisted of samples from five locations clustering together in the PCA. However, we observed large differentiation between the French and the US populations, as shown by the high Fst (0.27 to 0.29), which is likely the result of numerous factors, including selection, genetic drift, founder effect and absence of gene flow between these geographically distant populations. In addition, the European farmed populations originated from Californian domesticated strains, which have been shown to differ from strains of North-Western USA [136]. We found 34 haplotypes distributed over 21 chromosomes that differed between

the American pooled population (HA) and the three French populations (see Additional file 1: Fig. S1a).

Due to the moderate to large differentiation between the four populations, conserved genomic regions are expected to result from ancient natural selection traces. As the ROH-based inbreeding coefficients were quite high in the French populations (0.12 to 0.20), focusing only on French populations may affect the detection of shared regions that are putatively under selection because of genetic drift or inbreeding. Including unrelated and weakly inbred American fish in this comparative study strengthened the ability to detect regions that are putatively shared at the species level, which is of great interest for understanding genome evolution. Similarly, the mixed nature of the HA population provided better insight into the genetic diversity in rainbow trout and highlighted the importance of the conserved regions.

### Comparison of methods to detect shared signatures of positive selection

We used a double-check of positive selection traces in the genome by using both the ROH and EHH approaches. Regions that are detected by more than one method
<table><caption>**Table 7** List and functions of the four genes annotated in three heterozygous regions (chr10_a, chr19_a, and chr19_b) shared by the four populations</caption><thead><tr><th>Region</th><th>Gene name</th><th>Protein name</th><th>General function</th><th>References</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>chr10_a</td><td>ctnna2</td><td>catenin alpha 2</td><td>Enables actin filament binding activity, and involved in negative regulation of Arp2/3 complex-mediated actin nucleation. Regulation of neuron migration and of neuron projection development. Implicated in brain malformations. Seems implicated in vertebral development(/deformities) in Yunlong grouper</td><td>[123] vertebrates; [124] Yunlong grouper</td></tr><tr><td>chr19_a</td><td>smarca5</td><td>SWI/SNF-related matrix-associated actin-dependent regulator of chromatin subfamily A member 5</td><td>The protein encoded by this gene is a member of the SWI/SNF family of proteins. Members of this family have helicase and ATPase activities and are thought to regulate transcription of certain genes by altering the chromatin structure around those genes. The protein encoded by this gene is a component of the chromatin remodeling and spacing factor RSF, a facilitator of the transcription of class II genes by RNA polymerase II</td><td>[125] zebrafish; [126] mice; [127] zebrafish</td></tr><tr><td>frem2</td><td>FRAS1-related extracellular matrix protein 2</td><td></td><td>Plays a role in epidermal-dermal interactions—> important for the integrity of skin and renal epithelia</td><td>[128] zebrafish</td></tr><tr><td>chr19_b</td><td>pou4f2</td><td>POU domain, class 4, transcription factor 2-like</td><td>May be involved in maintaining visual system neurons in the retina, and in the lateral line. The level of the encoded protein is also elevated in a majority of breast cancers, resulting in accelerated tumor growth. Seems link to cardiac development in zerafish</td><td>[129] zebrafish; [130] zebrafish</td></tr></tbody></table>

populations were consistent with the PCA that we performed and the history of these populations with a partially common INRAE origin [59]. This trend is shared between European farmed populations with, e.g., an average Fst of 0.13 between 12 European rainbow trout strains [133]. Similarly, US farmed rainbow trout populations are also weakly to moderately differentiated, with an average Fst of 0.09 [134] or 0.13 [135] and pairwise Fst ranging from 0.06 to 0.16. We observed a similar pattern in the present study, with individuals from the HA population, which consisted of samples from five locations clustering together in the PCA. However, we observed large differentiation between the French and the US populations, as shown by the high Fst (0.27 to 0.29), which is likely the result of numerous factors, including selection, genetic drift, founder effect and absence of gene flow between these geographically distant populations. In addition, the European farmed populations originated from Californian domesticated strains, which have been shown to differ from strains of North-Western USA [136]. We found 34 haplotypes distributed over 21 chromosomes that differed between

the American pooled population (HA) and the three French populations (see Additional file 1: Fig. S1a).

Due to the moderate to large differentiation between the four populations, conserved genomic regions are expected to result from ancient natural selection traces. As the ROH-based inbreeding coefficients were quite high in the French populations (0.12 to 0.20), focusing only on French populations may affect the detection of shared regions that are putatively under selection because of genetic drift or inbreeding. Including unrelated and weakly inbred American fish in this comparative study strengthened the ability to detect regions that are putatively shared at the species level, which is of great interest for understanding genome evolution. Similarly, the mixed nature of the HA population provided better insight into the genetic diversity in rainbow trout and highlighted the importance of the conserved regions.

### Comparison of methods to detect shared signatures of positive selection

We used a double-check of positive selection traces in the genome by using both the ROH and EHH approaches. Regions that are detected by more than one method
provide stronger evidence of signatures of selection by reducing the number of false positives [38, 45]. However, for each population, only a few regions were identified by both methods. Although both the ROH and iHS approaches evaluate large homozygous stretches in the genome, iHS considers additional information using haplotypic version and linkage disequilibrium from a focal SNP. The ROH approach detects homozygous regions regardless of their haplotypic versions, contrary to the iHS approach. Thus, the latter may detect a signature of positive selection even if various haplotypes are present at the homozygous state in the population. As a result, the iHS approach can detect recent signatures of selection (before fixation of the favorable alleles), while the ROH-based approach may be more efficient in detecting older signatures of selection [45]. In addition, while the ROH approach only detects large homozygous stretches (at least 500 kb in the present study), iHS can detect small regions under positive selection since the only limit on the size of an EHH region is based on a threshold for a minimum LD (0.10). Consequently, the sizes of the detected homozygous regions ranged from 1065 to 2857 kb based on the ROH approach and from 1000 to 1600 kb based on the iHS approach.

The large number of regions (55, 69, 73, and 362 for LB, LC, SY, and HA, respectively) detected by the iHS approach in our study is consistent with numbers that have been reported for Atlantic salmon [33] or cattle [65], although these studies used a less stringent significance threshold than we did (– log(p-value) ≥ 3 and 2, respectively, vs > 4 in our study). Smaller numbers of regions were detected using iHS by Cádiz et al. [38] in rainbow trout and by López et al. [39] in Coho salmon, likely because of the lower density of SNPs that was used in both studies (57K and 200K versus 665K in our study) and the subsequent lower ability to detect LD and haplotypes at a fine scale.

In the Chilean rainbow trout study [38] based on the 5K array, only one signal of positive selection was detected by the iHS approach, which was located at 6.398–14.936 Mb on Omy20 of the Swanson reference genome, which corresponds to the region from 7.488 to 16.111 Mb on Omy20 of the Arlee reference genome. We also detected signals of selection by iHS in each of our four populations, located at 10.5–16.5 Mb for LB, at 11.2–13.3 Mb for LC, at 13.0–14.2 Mb for SY, and at 12.3–13.2 Mb for HA (see Additional file 2: Tables S6–S9, for LB, LC, SY, and HA, respectively). Thus, all these signals were consistent with the larger region identified by Cádiz et al. [38]. We identified a putative signature of selection that was shared by all four populations that was located at 13.0–13.2 Mb on Omy20. In this 200-kb-region, we observed at least one iHS value higher than

[2.5] for the LB, LC, and SY lines, but not for the HA population. Six annotated genes were identified in this region (*lgi1*, *noc3l*, *plce1*, *slc35g1*, *fra10ac1*, and *tbc1d12*). Two of these genes, were reported as candidates genes associated with domestication by Cádiz et al. [38], *noc3l* and *plce1*. These two genes are also related to early development traits in zebrafish (*noc3l* [137] and *plce1* [138]).

## Biological functions of genes under positive or balancing selection

Most of the 282 genes in the 13 regions that were detected under either positive or balancing selection, are assumed to play essential roles in major biological functions (genome stability, cell organization, neuronal and embryonic development, energy metabolism, growth, reproduction, and immunity). All these biological functions were previously identified in studies of signatures of selection on farmed rainbow trout [38] and other domesticated species [33, 39, 40, 116, 119, 120].

## Hotspots of heterozygosity and balancing selection for fitness traits

In livestock species, many variants that are under balancing selection are known to improve zootechnical performances when present in the heterozygous state but to be deleterious in the homozygous state [139, 140]. In such cases, in general, only one homozygous state is lethal, while the alternative homozygous state is observed in the population (i.e. ROH can be identified). We identified four regions that are potentially involved in balancing selection and that lack long stretches of homozygosity. Although these regions display a high level of heterozygosity, the proteins encoded by the genes that they contain are highly conserved among vertebrates (see Additional file 2: Table S18). Many processes can explain these results that may be surprising at first glance. First, these regions may concentrate polymorphisms in non-coding parts of the genome. Polymorphisms in intronic regions of a gene can lead to different proteins via alternative splicing. In addition, there could be an excess of synonymous polymorphisms in the exons, without effects on proteins. Further analyses must be conducted to better understand the mechanisms that maintain such regions of extreme polymorphism, either validating the hypothesis of balancing selection or the existence of high mutation or recombination rates in these regions in the trout genome assembly.

In the heterozygous region chr10_a, the gene *ctnna2* (Table 7) plays an essential role in development of the brain in vertebrates [123]. In the Yunlong grouper, the *ctnna2* gene may be involved in vertebral development, since it is significantly differentially expressed between normal fish and fish with lordosis [124]. While
provide stronger evidence of signatures of selection by reducing the number of false positives [38, 45]. However, for each population, only a few regions were identified by both methods. Although both the ROH and iHS approaches evaluate large homozygous stretches in the genome, iHS considers additional information using haplotypic version and linkage disequilibrium from a focal SNP. The ROH approach detects homozygous regions regardless of their haplotypic versions, contrary to the iHS approach. Thus, the latter may detect a signature of positive selection even if various haplotypes are present at the homozygous state in the population. As a result, the iHS approach can detect recent signatures of selection (before fixation of the favorable alleles), while the ROH-based approach may be more efficient in detecting older signatures of selection [45]. In addition, while the ROH approach only detects large homozygous stretches (at least 500 kb in the present study), iHS can detect small regions under positive selection since the only limit on the size of an EHH region is based on a threshold for a minimum LD (0.10). Consequently, the sizes of the detected homozygous regions ranged from 1065 to 2857 kb based on the ROH approach and from 1000 to 1600 kb based on the iHS approach.

The large number of regions (55, 69, 73, and 362 for LB, LC, SY, and HA, respectively) detected by the iHS approach in our study is consistent with numbers that have been reported for Atlantic salmon [33] or cattle [65], although these studies used a less stringent significance threshold than we did (– log(p-value) ≥ 3 and 2, respectively, vs > 4 in our study). Smaller numbers of regions were detected using iHS by Cádiz et al. [38] in rainbow trout and by López et al. [39] in Coho salmon, likely because of the lower density of SNPs that was used in both studies (57K and 200K versus 665K in our study) and the subsequent lower ability to detect LD and haplotypes at a fine scale.

In the Chilean rainbow trout study [38] based on the 5K array, only one signal of positive selection was detected by the iHS approach, which was located at 6.398–14.936 Mb on Omy20 of the Swanson reference genome, which corresponds to the region from 7.488 to 16.111 Mb on Omy20 of the Arlee reference genome. We also detected signals of selection by iHS in each of our four populations, located at 10.5–16.5 Mb for LB, at 11.2–13.3 Mb for LC, at 13.0–14.2 Mb for SY, and at 12.3–13.2 Mb for HA (see Additional file 2: Tables S6–S9, for LB, LC, SY, and HA, respectively). Thus, all these signals were consistent with the larger region identified by Cádiz et al. [38]. We identified a putative signature of selection that was shared by all four populations that was located at 13.0–13.2 Mb on Omy20. In this 200-kb-region, we observed at least one iHS value higher than

[2.5] for the LB, LC, and SY lines, but not for the HA population. Six annotated genes were identified in this region (*lgi1*, *noc3l*, *plce1*, *slc35g1*, *fra10ac1*, and *tbc1d12*). Two of these genes, were reported as candidate genes associated with domestication by Cádiz et al. [38], *noc3l* and *plce1*. These two genes are also related to early development traits in zebrafish (*noc3l* [137] and *plce1* [138]).

## Biological functions of genes under positive or balancing selection

Most of the 282 genes in the 13 regions that were detected under either positive or balancing selection, are assumed to play essential roles in major biological functions (genome stability, cell organization, neuronal and embryonic development, energy metabolism, growth, reproduction, and immunity). All these biological functions were previously identified in studies of signatures of selection on farmed rainbow trout [38] and other domesticated species [33, 39, 40, 116, 119, 120].

## Hotspots of heterozygosity and balancing selection for fitness traits

In livestock species, many variants that are under balancing selection are known to improve zootechnical performances when present in the heterozygous state but to be deleterious in the homozygous state [139, 140]. In such cases, in general, only one homozygous state is lethal, while the alternative homozygous state is observed in the population (i.e. ROH can be identified). We identified four regions that are potentially involved in balancing selection and that lack long stretches of homozygosity. Although these regions display a high level of heterozygosity, the proteins encoded by the genes that they contain are highly conserved among vertebrates (see Additional file 2: Table S18). Many processes can explain these results that may be surprising at first glance. First, these regions may concentrate polymorphisms in non-coding parts of the genome. Polymorphisms in intronic regions of a gene can lead to different proteins via alternative splicing. In addition, there could be an excess of synonymous polymorphisms in the exons, without effects on proteins. Further analyses must be conducted to better understand the mechanisms that maintain such regions of extreme polymorphism, either validating the hypothesis of balancing selection or the existence of high mutation or recombination rates in these regions in the trout genome assembly.

In the heterozygous region chr10_a, the gene *ctnna2* (Table 7) plays an essential role in development of the brain in vertebrates [123]. In the Yunlong grouper, the *ctnna2* gene may be involved in vertebral development, since it is significantly differentially expressed between normal fish and fish with lordosis [124]. While
the protein encoded by this gene is highly conserved among vertebrates ([123] and see Additional file 2: Table S18), its gene exhibits a high level of polymorphism in the four studied rainbow trout populations. However, a large part of this polymorphism is located in one of its introns (intron 6). In the Zebrafish Information Network (ZFIN) database, five transcripts have been identified for this gene (three mRNA and two non-coding RNA). We hypothesise that the polymorphism in the intronic region of *ctnna2* is essential for alternative splicing.

In the heterozygous region chr13_a (see Additional file 2: Table S17), the *map2k4* gene is involved in a variety of cellular processes (proliferation, differentiation, transcription regulation, development), plays a role in liver organogenesis and embryonic development during gastrulation, as demonstrated by morpholino-mediated knockdown in zebrafish [141], and is involved in immune response in the yellow catfish [142]. It has been suggested that the high degree of polymorphism of the *map2k4* gene is associated with the inflammatory process in immune response, which is consistent with our hypothesis of balancing selection and, more precisely, of a potential ancestral trans-species polymorphism in this genomic region [7, 143]. Trans-species polymorphism is a crucial evolutionary mechanism for shaping adaptative genetic variation across taxa [144]. The study of this mechanism has primarily concentrated on the genes of the major histocompatibility complex, but a few studies have described this process for other immune genes [145–147]. Maintaining genetic diversity in regions related to the immune system may be essential for resilience against various pathogens. In addition, this region on Omy13 has recently been identified as a significant quantitative trait locus (QTL) for resistance to high temperature [77].

In the heterozygous region chr19_a (Table 7), the gene *frem2* encodes an extracellular matrix protein that is required to maintain the integrity of skin and renal epithelia in zebrafish [128]. This protein is moderately conserved across vertebrates (see Additional file 2: Table S18). In a study on the detection of genomic regions with ancestral trans-species polymorphism shared between humans and chimpanzees [146], *frem3*, an important paralog of *frem2*, was identified under balancing selection. However, further studies should test the hypothesis of trans-species conservation of the *map2k4* and *frem2* genes to help decipher the various cellular processes in which they are involved.

## Hotspots of homozygosity and positive selection for essential biological functions

### Regions and genes involved in early development

In the homozygous chr2_a and chr15_a regions, many genes play essential roles in early development and later in fitness (*cep162*, *tsnare1* and *mrap2* in the chr2_a, and *chn1*, *atp5mc1*, *zc3h15*, *nid2* and *brca2* in the chr15_a regions) (see Additional file 2: Table S12). In the homozygous chr2_b region (see Additional file 2: Table S12), the *pbx1* (*pre-B-cell leukemia transcription factor 1*) gene is related to early development in zebrafish [148] and was identified to be under positive selection in a Chilean farmed rainbow trout population [38]. Mutations in this gene generally cause major malformations, which have been suggested to play an essential role in survival in various species (zebrafish [148]; mouse [149]; and humans [150]).

Three genes located in close proximity in the chr16_a region between 46.42 and 46.53 Mb (see Additional file 2: Table S11), *samd10* (*sterile alpha motif domain-containing protein 10-like*), *dnajc5* (*dnaJ homolog subfamily C member 5-like*), and *tpd54* (*tumor protein D54*) were also detected to be in close proximity and under positive selection in ten modern goat breeds and one wild Bezoar goat breed [120]. This cluster of genes plays a role in survival and cellular processes (see Additional file 2: Table S12). In addition, in this chr16_a region, the *magi2* (*membrane-associated guanylate kinase*, *WW and PDZ domain-containing protein 2*) gene plays a vital role in the embryogenesis of zebrafish [151] and was identified to be under positive selection in a domesticated sheep breed compared to the wild Asiatic mouflon [115].

### Regions and genes involved in neural and brain development and behaviour

In total, we identified seven genes that are primarily associated with neural and brain development in regions that were identified to be under positive selection (*tsnare1*, *cdk14*, *brsk2a*, *auts2*, *brd2*, *znf135*, and *grxcr1*). Some of these genes (*brsk2a*, *znf135*, *grxcr1*, and *auts2*; see Additional file 2: Table S12) may induce modifications of the behavior in farmed animals, which could be related to domestication processes [18, 118, 149, 152]. This is in line with results of Żarski et al. [153], who demonstrated that domestication modulates the expression of genes involved in neurogenesis. In particular, the *auts2* gene was previously identified to be under positive selection in cattle [122] and in domesticated Atlantic salmon
the protein encoded by this gene is highly conserved among vertebrates ([123] and see Additional file 2: Table S18), its gene exhibits a high level of polymorphism in the four studied rainbow trout populations. However, a large part of this polymorphism is located in one of its introns (intron 6). In the Zebrafish Information Network (ZFIN) database, five transcripts have been identified for this gene (three mRNA and two non-coding RNA). We hypothesise that the polymorphism in the intronic region of *ctnna2* is essential for alternative splicing.

In the heterozygous region chr13_a (see Additional file 2: Table S17), the *map2k4* gene is involved in a variety of cellular processes (proliferation, differentiation, transcription regulation, development), plays a role in liver organogenesis and embryonic development during gastrulation, as demonstrated by morpholino-mediated knockdown in zebrafish [141], and is involved in immune response in the yellow catfish [142]. It has been suggested that the high degree of polymorphism of the *map2k4* gene is associated with the inflammatory process in immune response, which is consistent with our hypothesis of balancing selection and, more precisely, of a potential ancestral trans-species polymorphism in this genomic region [7, 143]. Trans-species polymorphism is a crucial evolutionary mechanism for sharping adaptative genetic variation across taxa [144]. The study of this mechanism has primarily concentrated on the genes of the major histocompatibility complex, but a few studies have described this process for other immune genes [145–147]. Maintaining genetic diversity in regions related to the immune system may be essential for resilience against various pathogens. In addition, this region on Omy13 has recently been identified as a significant quantitative trait locus (QTL) for resistance to high temperature [77].

In the heterozygous region chr19_a (Table 7), the gene *frem2* encodes an extracellular matrix protein that is required to maintain the integrity of skin and renal epithelia in zebrafish [128]. This protein is moderately conserved across vertebrates (see Additional file 2: Table S18). In a study on the detection of genomic regions with ancestral trans-species polymorphism shared between humans and chimpanzees [146], *frem3*, an important paralog of *frem2*, was identified under balancing selection. However, further studies should test the hypothesis of trans-species conservation of the *map2k4* and *frem2* genes to help decipher the various cellular processes in which they are involved.

## Hotspots of homozygosity and positive selection for essential biological functions

### Regions and genes involved in early development

In the homozygous chr2_a and chr15_a regions, many genes play essential roles in early development and later in fitness (*cep162*, *tsnare1* and *mrap2* in the chr2_a, and *chn1*, *atp5mc1*, *zc3h15*, *nid2* and *brca2* in the chr15_a regions) (see Additional file 2: Table S12). In the homozygous chr2_b region (see Additional file 2: Table S12), the *pbx1* (*pre-B-cell leukemia transcription factor 1*) gene is related to early development in zebrafish [148] and was identified to be under positive selection in a Chilean farmed rainbow trout population [38]. Mutations in this gene generally cause major malformations, which have been suggested to play an essential role in survival in various species (zebrafish [148]; mouse [149]; and humans [150]).

Three genes located in close proximity in the chr16_a region between 46.42 and 46.53 Mb (see Additional file 2: Table S11), *samd10* (*sterile alpha motif domain-containing protein 10-like*), *dnajc5* (*dnaJ homolog subfamily C member 5-like*), and *tpd54* (*tumor protein D54*) were also detected to be in close proximity and under positive selection in ten modern goat breeds and one wild Bezoar goat breed [120]. This cluster of genes plays a role in survival and cellular processes (see Additional file 2: Table S12). In addition, in this chr16_a region, the *magi2* (*membrane-associated guanylate kinase*, *WW and PDZ domain-containing protein 2*) gene plays a vital role in the embryogenesis of zebrafish [151] and was identified to be under positive selection in a domesticated sheep breed compared to the wild Asiatic mouflon [115].

### Regions and genes involved in neural and brain development and behaviour

In total, we identified seven genes that are primarily associated with neural and brain development in regions that were identified to be under positive selection (*tsnare1*, *cdk14*, *brsk2a*, *auts2*, *brd2*, *znf135*, and *grxcr1*). Some of these genes (*brsk2a*, *znf135*, *grxcr1*, and *auts2*; see Additional file 2: Table S12) may induce modifications of the behavior in farmed animals, which could be related to domestication processes [18, 118, 149, 152]. This is in line with results of Żarski et al. [153], who demonstrated that domestication modulates the expression of genes involved in neurogenesis. In particular, the *auts2* gene was previously identified to be under positive selection in cattle [122] and in domesticated Atlantic salmon
populations from Canada and Scotland compared to their wild Atlantic salmon counterpart [116]. The *znf135* gene was also identified to be under positive selection in a farmed population of Atlantic salmon compared to a wild-type population [30]. These results strongly suggest that all these genes play a key role in domestication processes and may act on essential behaviors in both terrestrial and aquatic farmed animals.

## Regions and genes involved in growth metabolism

Genes related to growth metabolism were present only in four regions that were identified to be under positive selection (see Additional file 2: Table S12), and none of these were present in regions of high heterozygosity. In the homozygous *chr2_a* region, the loss of function of the *mrap2* (*melanocortin-2 receptor accessory protein 2A*) gene is associated with severe obesity in many species (humans, zebrafish, rodent: [85]; sea lamprey: [86]; snakehead: [87]), and was shown to be under positive selection in the Chilean farmed rainbow trout population [38]. In addition, Yoshida et al. [154] identified this gene as a good candidate gene for a QTL associated with growth in Atlantic salmon. A QTL for sea lice resistance in rainbow trout [155] was also detected in the same region (between 10.43 and 11.81 Mb on the Swanson reference genome), which is presumably related to the interplay between resistance to sea lice, immune response and growth potential [156]. The homozygous *chr2_b* region includes two genes that were previously identified to be under positive selection, the *col9a2* (*collagen alpha-2(IX) chain*) gene, in a Scottish farmed population of Atlantic salmon [116], and the *scap* (*sterol regulatory element-binding protein cleavage-activating protein*) gene in six farmed Pacific white shrimp populations [117]. In the homozygous region *chr2_d*, the *igf-1α* (*insulin like growth factor receptor 1a*) gene has been shown to be differentially expressed between domesticated and wild populations of rainbow trout and coho salmon [157], and between larvae from domesticated spawners and larvae from wild spawners of the Eurasian perch [158]. In addition, the *igf-1* gene has been noted as a marker of domestication in dogs [118]. And finally, in the homozygous *chr16_a* region, the *emilin-3a* (*elastin microfibril inter-facer 3a*) gene is known to be involved in muscle fiber development in zebrafish [159], and has been identified to be under positive selection in a F2 farmed population compared to the first generation (F1) of the domestication of a wild population of Australian snapper [40]. This signature of selection can, therefore, be considered as having resulted from domestication.

All identified growth-related genes are assumed to be associated with domestication. This assertion is confirmed for five genes (*mrap2*, *col9a2*, *scap*, *igf-1α*, and *emilin-3*) that were also identified to be under positive selection in various farmed populations (see Additional file 2: Table S12).

## Regions and genes involved in reproduction

A few genes that are directly associated with reproduction were identified in highly homozygous regions (see Additional file 2: Table S12). In the homozygous *chr2_b* region, the *brd2* (*bromodomain-containing protein 2*) gene is involved in neural and brain development and in oogenesis and egg-to-embryo transition in zebrafish [160]. This gene was also identified to be under positive selection in a selected Canadian population of Atlantic salmon [116] and is located within a QTL for egg size in rainbow trout [161]. Khendek et al. [162] compared the reproductive performances (egg size, gonadal histology, hormonal levels) of Eurasian perch wild broodstock with those of domesticated and F1 fish and showed that domestication may have increased the diameter of the oocytes and the level of 17β-estradiol, and decreased the embryo survival of domesticated fish. In the homozygous *chr15_a* region, the *zp4* gene was identified to be under positive selection in a farmed Scottish population of Atlantic salmon compared to a wild population [116], and may be related to domestication.

## Regions and genes involved in immunity

In farmed brown trout, Magris et al. [41] observed that regions that were identified to be under positive selection revealed an enrichment of Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) terms related to viral infection. However, in our study, only three genes related to immune function were detected and no enrichment of immune terms was observed in the GO analysis. The three immune function genes are located in a single region that was putatively under positive selection and in a single region that was identified to be under balancing selection. In the homozygous *chr2_b* region, two genes were related to immune functions, the *tnfaip8l2b* (*tumor necrosis factor, alpha-induced protein 8-like protein 2 B*) and *atg5* (*autophagy protein 5*) genes (see Additional file 2: Table S12). In the heterozygous *chr16_a* region, the *atp1b3* (*sodium/potassium-transporting ATPase subunit beta-1-interacting protein 3*) gene was identified to be under positive selection in farmed Atlantic salmon [119]. This gene induces NF-kappa B activation to inhibit viral replication, such as for hepatitis B, HIV, and EV71 [163, 164]. In addition, *atp1b3a* and *atp1b3b* paralogs have
populations from Canada and Scotland compared to their wild Atlantic salmon counterpart [116]. The *znf135* gene was also identified to be under positive selection in a farmed population of Atlantic salmon compared to a wild-type population [30]. These results strongly suggest that all these genes play a key role in domestication processes and may act on essential behaviors in both terrestrial and aquatic farmed animals.

## Regions and genes involved in growth metabolism

Genes related to growth metabolism were present only in four regions that were identified to be under positive selection (see Additional file 2: Table S12), and none of these were present in regions of high heterozygosity. In the homozygous *chr2_a* region, the loss of function of the *mrap2* (*melanocortin-2 receptor accessory protein 2A*) gene is associated with severe obesity in many species (humans, zebrafish, rodent: [85]; sea lamprey: [86]; snakehead: [87]), and was shown to be under positive selection in the Chilean farmed rainbow trout population [38]. In addition, Yoshida et al. [154] identified this gene as a good candidate gene for a QTL associated with growth in Atlantic salmon. A QTL for sea lice resistance in rainbow trout [155] was also detected in the same region (between 10.43 and 11.81 Mb on the Swanson reference genome), which is presumably related to the interplay between resistance to sea lice, immune response and growth potential [156]. The homozygous *chr2_b* region includes two genes that were previously identified to be under positive selection, the *col9a2* (*collagen alpha-2(IX) chain*) gene, in a Scottish farmed population of Atlantic salmon [116], and the *scap* (*sterol regulatory element-binding protein cleavage-activating protein*) gene in six farmed Pacific white shrimp populations [117]. In the homozygous region *chr2_d*, the *igf-1a* (*insulin like growth factor receptor 1a*) gene has been shown to be differentially expressed between domesticated and wild populations of rainbow trout and coho salmon [157], and between larvae from domesticated spawners and larvae from wild spawners of the Eurasian perch [158]. In addition, the *igf-1* gene has been noted as a marker of domestication in dogs [118]. And finally, in the homozygous *chr16_a* region, the *emilin-3a* (*elastin microfibril inter-facer 3a*) gene is known to be involved in muscle fiber development in zebrafish [159], and has been identified to be under positive selection in a F2 farmed population compared to the first generation (F1) of the domestication of a wild population of Australian snapper [40]. This signature of selection can, therefore, be considered as having resulted from domestication.

All identified growth-related genes are assumed to be associated with domestication. This assertion is confirmed for five genes (*mrap2*, *col9a2*, *scap*, *igf-1a*, and *emilin-3*) that were also identified to be under positive selection in various farmed populations (see Additional file 2: Table S12).

## Regions and genes involved in reproduction

A few genes that are directly associated with reproduction were identified in highly homozygous regions (see Additional file 2: Table S12). In the homozygous *chr2_b* region, the *brd2* (*bromodomain-containing protein 2*) gene is involved in neural and brain development and in oogenesis and egg-to-embryo transition in zebrafish [160]. This gene was also identified to be under positive selection in a selected Canadian population of Atlantic salmon [116] and is located within a QTL for egg size in rainbow trout [161]. Khendek et al. [162] compared the reproductive performances (egg size, gonadal histology, hormonal levels) of Eurasian perch wild broodstock with those of domesticated and F1 fish and showed that domestication may have increased the diameter of the oocytes and the level of 17β-estradiol, and decreased the embryo survival of domesticated fish. In the homozygous *chr15_a* region, the *zp4* gene was identified to be under positive selection in a farmed Scottish population of Atlantic salmon compared to a wild population [116], and may be related to domestication.

## Regions and genes involved in immunity

In farmed brown trout, Magris et al. [41] observed that regions that were identified to be under positive selection revealed an enrichment of Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) terms related to viral infection. However, in our study, only three genes related to immune function were detected and no enrichment of immune terms was observed in the GO analysis. The three immune function genes are located in a single region that was putatively under positive selection and in a single region that was identified to be under balancing selection. In the homozygous *chr2_b* region, two genes were related to immune functions, the *tnfaip8l2b* (*tumor necrosis factor, alpha-induced protein 8-like protein 2 B*) and *atg5* (*autophagy protein 5*) genes (see Additional file 2: Table S12). In the heterozygous *chr16_a* region, the *atp1b3* (*sodium/potassium-transporting ATPase subunit beta-1-interacting protein 3*) gene was identified to be under positive selection in farmed Atlantic salmon [119]. This gene induces NF-kappa B activation to inhibit viral replication, such as for hepatitis B, HIV, and EV71 [163, 164]. In addition, *atp1b3a* and *atp1b3b* paralogs have
been hypothesized to be involved in the physiological
response to low salinity in the Senegalese sole [165].

Conclusions

We identified 13 regions under selection and these
regions contained numerous genes that are involved in
essential biological functions. By identifying signatures of
selection that are shared by the four rainbow trout popu-
lations, we focused on regions related to ancient evolu-
tionary processes that are essential for species survival.
We identified only nine homozygous regions that are pre-
sumably under positive selection and four heterozygous
regions that are putatively under balancing selection in
all four populations. While shared homozygous regions
may be associated with important biological functions
that underly both fitness and domestication in rainbow
trout, the heterozygous regions appeared to be mainly
linked to fitness and survival functions (cell organiza-
tion, embryonic development, and immunity) at different
developmental stages or to functions involved in coping
with various pathogens or abiotic stressors. Maintaining
genetic diversity in these latter regions could be essential
for species survival. This study confirmed the relevance
of 17 genes that were previously identified to be under
positive selection, 10 of which in fishes among other ver-
tebrates ( *auts2*, *atp1b3*, *zp4*, *znf135*, *igf-1a*, *brd2*, *col9a2*,
*mrap2*, *pbx1* and *emilin-3*). We also identified new prom-
ising candidate genes that may be important for rain-
bow trout fitness. This study substantially increases our
knowledge about the genomic location and nature of
the genetic variation essential for fish survival. The can-
didate regions identified to be under selection and even
more, those identified to be under balancing selection,
are a material of choice for further investigation. Indeed,
these results, in combination with new sequencing tech-
nologies that allow for long-fragment reads, will make it
possible to better understand the fine genome dynam-
ics involved in the selection process of such a complex
genome.

**Supplementary Information**

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.
org/10.1186/s12711-024-00884-9.

**Additional file 1: Figure S1.** Principal component analysis (PCA) of the genetic diversity of SY, and HA sub-populations (a) and of the five North American subpopulations grouped in the HA population (b), based on 546,903 SNPs. Elwha is the only wild population.

**Additional file 2: Table S1.** Shared signatures of selection between the French lines (LB, LC and SY) and the American pooled population (HA) detected by the XP-EHH statistics. **Table S2.** List of ROH islands for the LB population. **Table S3.** List of ROH islands for the LC population. **Table S4.** List of ROH islands for the SY population. **Table S5.** List of ROH islands for the HA population. **Table S6.** List of significant signatures of selection identified by iHS for the LB population. **Table S7.** List of significant

signals of selection identified by iHS for the LC population. **Table S8.** List of significant signals of selection identified by iHS for the SY population. **Table S9.** List of significant signals of selection identified by iHS for the HA population. **Table S10.** iHS and ROH values per population within the nine overlapping regions detected among the four populations. **Table S11.** List of the 253 genes included in the nine shared genomic regions. In bold, genes identified as linked to domestication in the literature. **Table S12.** List and functions of the 17 genes annotated in the three homozygous regions (chr2_a, chr2_c and chr15_a) shared by the four rainbow trout populations, and the 15 genes in the six other regions previously identified in the literature as signatures of selection [159, 166–183]. **Table S13.** List of the heterozygous regions (i.e., large regions without ROH) for the LB population. **Table S14.** List of the heterozygous regions (i.e., large regions without ROH) for the LC population. **Table S15.** List of the heterozygous regions (i.e., large regions without ROH) for the SY population. **Table S16.** List of the heterozygous regions (i.e., large regions without ROH) for the HA population. **Table S17.** List of the 29 genes included in the four heterozygous genomic regions. **Table S18.** Percentage of protein homology between rainbow trout and nine other vertebrate species for the genes annotated in the heterozygous chr10_a, chr13_a, chr19_a and chr19_b regions.

Acknowledgements

We thank the two breeding compagnies "Viviers de Sarrance" and "Milin Nevez" that allowed us to use their HD genotypes to perform the study. This study was partly supported by the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and FranceAgrimer (Hypotemp project, no P FEA470019FA1000016).

Author contributions

KP developed the methodology, carried out the investigations and the formal analysis, and wrote the original draft; GR participated in the conception of the methodology and reviewed the draft; FP supervised the work, conceived the study and methodology, and participated to the investigations, formal analysis, and writing of the original draft. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Availability of data and materials

Restrictions apply to the availability of the data that support the findings of this study, which were used under license and are not publicly available. The data can be made available for reproduction of the results from Florence Phocas (florence.phocas@inrae.fr) on request via a material transfer agreement and with permission of the two breeding companies "Viviers de Sarrance" (Sarrance, France) and "Milin Nevez" (Plouigneau, France).

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Received: 9 March 2023 Accepted: 12 February 2024

Published online: 22 February 2024

**References**

1. Wright S. Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics. 1931;16:97–159.

2. Lynch M, Conery J, Burger R. Mutation accumulation and the extinction of small populations. Am Nat. 1995;146:489–518.

3. East EM. The role of reproduction in evolution. Am Nat. 1918;52:273–89.
been hypothesized to be involved in the physiological
response to low salinity in the Senegalese sole [165].

Conclusions

We identified 13 regions under selection and these
regions contained numerous genes that are involved in
essential biological functions. By identifying signatures of
selection that are shared by the four rainbow trout popu-
lations, we focused on regions related to ancient evolu-
tionary processes that are essential for species survival.
We identified only nine homozygous regions that are pre-
sumably under positive selection and four heterozygous
regions that are putatively under balancing selection in
all four populations. While shared homozygous regions
may be associated with important biological functions
that underly both fitness and domestication in rainbow
trout, the heterozygous regions appeared to be mainly
linked to fitness and survival functions (cell organiza-
tion, embryonic development, and immunity) at different
developmental stages or to functions involved in coping
with various pathogens or abiotic stressors. Maintaining
genetic diversity in these latter regions could be essential
for species survival. This study confirmed the relevance
of 17 genes that were previously identified to be under
positive selection, 10 of which in fishes among other ver-
tebrates ( *auts2*, *atp1b3*, *zp4*, *znf135*, *igf-1a*, *brd2*, *col9a2*,
*mrap2*, *pbx1* and *emilin-3*). We also identified new prom-
ising candidate genes that may be important for rain-
bow trout fitness. This study substantially increases our
knowledge about the genomic location and nature of
the genetic variation essential for fish survival. The can-
didate regions identified to be under selection and even
more, those identified to be under balancing selection,
are a material of choice for further investigation. Indeed,
these results, in combination with new sequencing tech-
nologies that allow for long-fragment reads, will make it
possible to better understand the fine genome dynam-
ics involved in the selection process of such a complex
genome.

**Supplementary Information**

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.
org/10.1186/s12711-024-00884-9.

**Additional file 1: Figure S1.** Principal component analysis (PCA) of the genetic diversity of SY, and HA sub-populations (a) and of the five North American subpopulations grouped in the HA population (b), based on 546,903 SNPs. Elwha is the only wild population.

**Additional file 2: Table S1.** Shared signatures of selection between the French lines (LB, LC and SY) and the American pooled population (HA) detected by the XP-EHH statistics. **Table S2.** List of ROH islands for the LB population. **Table S3.** List of ROH islands for the LC population. **Table S4.** List of ROH islands for the SY population. **Table S5.** List of ROH islands for the HA population. **Table S6.** List of significant signatures of selection identified by iHS for the LB population. **Table S7.** List of significant

signals of selection identified by iHS for the LC population. **Table S8.** List of significant signals of selection identified by iHS for the SY population. **Table S9.** List of significant signals of selection identified by iHS for the HA population. **Table S10.** iHS and ROH values per population within the nine overlapping regions detected among the four populations.

**Table S11.** List of the 253 genes included in the nine shared genomic regions. In bold, genes identified as linked to domestication in the literature. **Table S12.** List and functions of the 17 genes annotated in the three homozygous regions (chr2_a, chr2_c and chr15_a) shared by the four rainbow trout populations, and the 15 genes in the six other regions previously identified in the literature as signatures of selection [159, 166–183]. **Table S13.** List of the heterozygous regions (i.e., large regions without ROH) for the LB population. **Table S14.** List of the heterozygous regions (i.e., large regions without ROH) for the LC population. **Table S15.** List of the heterozygous regions (i.e., large regions without ROH) for the SY population. **Table S16.** List of the heterozygous regions (i.e., large regions without ROH) for the HA population. **Table S17.** List of the 29 genes included in the four heterozygous genomic regions. **Table S18.** Percentage of protein homology between rainbow trout and nine other vertebrate species for the genes annotated in the heterozygous chr10_a, chr13_a, chr19_a and chr19_b regions.

Acknowledgements

We thank the two breeding compagnies "Viviers de Sarrance" and "Milin Nevez" that allowed us to use their HD genotypes to perform the study. This study was partly supported by the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and FranceAgrimer (Hypotemp project, no P FEA470019FA1000016).

Author contributions

KP developed the methodology, carried out the investigations and the formal analysis, and wrote the original draft; GR participated in the conception of the methodology and reviewed the draft; FP supervised the work, conceived the study and methodology, and participated to the investigations, formal analysis, and writing of the original draft. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Availability of data and materials

Restrictions apply to the availability of the data that support the findings of this study, which were used under license and are not publicly available. The data can be made available for reproduction of the results from Florence Phocas (florence.phocas@inrae.fr) on request via a material transfer agreement and with permission of the two breeding companies "Viviers de Sarrance" (Sarrance, France) and "Milin Nevez" (Plouigneau, France).

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Received: 9 March 2023 Accepted: 12 February 2024

Published online: 22 February 2024

**References**

1. Wright S. Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics. 1931;16:97–159.

2. Lynch M, Conery J, Burger R. Mutation accumulation and the extinction of small populations. Am Nat. 1995;146:489–518.

3. East EM. The role of reproduction in evolution. Am Nat. 1918;52:273–89.
4. Fisher RA. The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1958.

5. Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B, Morgan MT. The pattern of neutral molecular variation under the background selection model. Genetics. 1995;141:1619-32.

6. Charlesworth D. Balancing selection and its effects on sequences in nearby genome regions. PLoS Genet. 2006;2:379-84.

7. Fijarczyk A, Babik W. Detecting balancing selection in genomes: limits and prospects. Mol Ecol. 2015;24:3529-45.

8. Darwin C. On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray; 1859.

9. Darwin C. The variation of animals and plants under domestication, vol. 2. London: John Murray; 1868.

10. Price EO. Behavioral aspects of animal domestication. Q Rev Biol. 1984;59:1-32.

11. Price EO. Behavioral development in animals undergoing domestication. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 1999;65:245-71.

12. Russell N. The wild side of animal domestication. Soc Anim. 2002;10:285-302.

13. Price EO. Animal domestication and behavior. Wallingford: CABI Publishing; 2002.

14. Harris DR. Agriculture, cultivation and domestication: exploring the conceptual framework of early food production. In: Denham TP, Iriarte J, Vrydaghs L, editors. Rethinking agriculture: archaeological and ethnoarchaeological perspectives. New York: Routledge; 2007.

15. La HD. domestication des animaux par les hommes préhistoriques. Paris: Masson; 1992.

16. Mignon-Grasteau S, Boissy A, Bouix J, Faure JM, Fisher AD, Hinch GN, et al. Genetics of adaptation and domestication in livestock. Livest Prod Sci. 2005;93:3-14.

17. Pulcini D, Wheeler PA, Cataudella S, Russo T, Thorgaard GH. Domestication shapes morphology in rainbow trout *Oncorhynchus mykiss*. J Fish Biol. 2013;82:390-407.

18. Milla S, Pasquet A, El Mohajer L, Fontaine P. How domestication alters fish phenotypes. Rev Aquacult. 2021;13:388-405.

19. Wilkins AS, Wrangham RW, Fitch WT. The "domestication syndrome" in mammals: a unified explanation based on neural crest cell behavior and genetics. Genetics. 2014;197:795-808.

20. Dobney K, Larson G. Genetics and animal domestication: new windows on an elusive process. J Zool. 2006;269:261-71.

21. Qanbari S, Simianer H. Mapping signatures of positive selection in the genome of livestock. Livest Sci. 2014;166:133-43.

22. Wright D. The genetic architecture of domestication in animals. Bioinform Biol Insights. 2015;9:11-20.

23. Balon EK. Origin and domestication of the wild carp, *Cyprinus carpio*: from Roman gourmets to the swimming flowers. Aquaculture. 1995;129:3-48.

24. Balon EK. About the oldest domesticates among fishes. J Fish Biol. 2004;65:1-27.

25. Hershberger WK. Genetic variability in rainbow trout populations. Aquaculture. 1992;100:51-71.

26. Gall GAE, Crandell PA. The rainbow trout. Aquaculture. 1992;100:1-10.

27. Teletchea F. Fish domestication: an overview. In Teletchea F, editor. Animal domestication. London: IntechOpen Ltd; 2018.

28. Sun L, Liu S, Wang R, Jiang Y, Zhang Y, Zhang J, et al. Identification and analysis of genome-wide SNPs provide insight into signatures of selection and domestication in channel catfish (*Ictalurus punctatus*). PLoS One. 2014;9: e109666.

29. Mäkinen H, Vasemägi A, McGinnity P, Cross TF, Primmer CR. Population genomic analyses of early-phase Atlantic salmon (*Salmo salar*) domestication/captive breeding. Evol Appl. 2015;8:93-107.

30. Gutierrez AP, Yáñez JM, Davidson WS. Evidence of recent signatures of selection during domestication in an Atlantic salmon population. Mar Genomics. 2016;26:41-50.

31. Liu L, Ang KP, Elliott JA, Kent MP, Lien S, MacDonald D, et al. A genome scan for selection signatures comparing farmed Atlantic salmon with two wild populations: testing colocalization among outlier markers, candidate genes, and quantitative trait loci for production traits. Evol Appl. 2017;10:276-96.

32. Pritchard VL, Mäkinen H, Vähä JP, Erkinoar J, Orell P, Primmer CR. Genomic signatures of fine-scale local selection in Atlantic salmon

suggest involvement of sexual maturation, energy homeostasis and immune defence-related genes. Mol Ecol. 2018;27:2560-75.

33. López ME, Linderoth T, Norris A, Lhorente JP, Neira R, Yáñez JM. Multiple selection signatures in farmed atlantic salmon adapted to different environments across hemispheres. Front Genet. 2019;10:901.

34. Su S, Li H, Du F, Zhang C, Li X, Jing X, et al. Combined QTL and genome scan analyses with the help of 2b-RAD identify growth-associated genetic markers in a new fast-growing carp strain. Front Genet. 2018;9:592.

35. Hong Xia J, Bai Z, Meng Z, Zhang Y, Wang L, Liu F, et al. Signatures of selection in tilapia revealed by whole genome resequencing. Sci Rep. 2015;5:14168.

36. Cádiz MI, López ME, Díaz-Domínguez D, Cáceres G, Yoshida GM, Gomez-Uchida D, et al. Whole genome re-sequencing reveals recent signatures of selection in three strains of farmed Nile tilapia (*Oreochromis niloticus*). Sci Rep. 2020;10:11514.

37. Yu X, Setyawan P, Bastiaansen JW, Liu L, Imron I, Groenen MA, et al. Genomic analysis of a Nile tilapia strain selected for salinity tolerance shows signatures of selection and hybridization with blue tilapia (*Oreochromis aureus*). Aquaculture. 2022;560:738527.

38. Cádiz MI, López ME, Díaz-Domínguez D, Cáceres G, Marin-Nahuelpi R, Gomez-Uchida D, et al. Detection of selection signatures in the genome of a farmed population of anadromous rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*). Genomics. 2021;113:3395-404.

39. López ME, Cádiz MI, Rondeau EB, Koop BF, Yáñez JM. Detection of selection signatures in farmed coho salmon (*Oncorhynchus kisutch*) using dense genome-wide information. Sci Rep. 2021;11:9685.

40. Baesjou JP, Wellenreuther M. Genomic signatures of domestication selection in the Australasian snapper (*Chrysophrys auratus*). Genes (Basel). 2021;12:1737.

41. Magris G, Marroni F, D'Agaro E, Vischi M, Chiabà C, Scaglione D, et al. ddRAD-seq reveals the genetic structure and detects signals of selection in Italian brown trout. Genet Sel Evol. 2022;54:8.

42. Smith JM, Haigh J. The hitch-hiking effect of a favourable gene. Genet Res. 1974;23:23-35.

43. Pennings PS, Hermisson J. Soft sweeps II—molecular population genetics of adaptation from recurrent mutation or migration. Mol Biol Evol. 2006;23:1076-84.

44. Vitti JJ, Grossman SR, Sabeti PC. Detecting natural selection in genomic data. Ann Rev Genet. 2013;47:97-120.

45. Saravanan KA, Panigrahi M, Kumar H, Bhushan B, Dutt T, Mishra BP. Selection signatures in livestock genome: a review of concepts, approaches and applications. Livest Sci. 2020;241: 104257.

46. McQuillan R, Leutenegger AL, Abdel-Rahman R, Franklin CS, Pericic M, Barac-Lauc L, et al. Runs of homozygosity in European populations. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;83:359-72.

47. Purfield DC, Berry DP, McParland S, Bradley DG. Runs of homozygosity and population history in cattle. BMC Genet. 2012;13:43.

48. Sabeti PC, Reich DE, Higgins JM, Levine HZ, Richter DJ, Schaffner SF, et al. Detecting recent positive selection in the human genome from haplotype structure. Nature. 2002;419:832-7.

49. Dollar AM, Katz M. Rainbow trout brood stocks and strains in American hatcheries as factors in the occurrence of hepatoma. Prog Fish C. 1964;167:174-226.

50. Thorgaard GH. Chromosomal differences among rainbow trout populations. Copeia. 1983;650:662-3.

51. Bean TH. The rainbow trout. First annual report of the Commissioners of Fisheries, game and forest of the State of New York. New York: Wynkoop Hallenbeck Crawford Co.; 1895. p135-140.

52. Martínez A, Garza JC, Pearse DE. A microsatellite genome screen identifies chromosomal regions under differential selection in steelhead and rainbow trout. Trans Am Fish Soc. 2011;140:829-42.

53. Limborg MT, Blankenship SM, Young SF, Utter FM, Seeb LW, Hansen MH, et al. Signatures of natural selection among lineages and habitats in *Oncorhynchus mykiss*. Ecol Evol. 2012;2:1-18.

54. Weinstein SY, Thrower FP, Nichols KM, Hale MC. A large-scale chromosomal inversion is not associated with life history development in rainbow trout from Southeast Alaska. PLoS One. 2019;14: e0223018.

55. Bernard M, Dehaullon A, Gao G, Paul K, Lagarde H, Charles M, et al. Development of a high-density 665k SNP array for rainbow trout genome-wide genotyping. Front Genet. 2022;13:941340.
4. Fisher RA. The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1958.

5. Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B, Morgan MT. The pattern of neutral molecular variation under the background selection model. Genetics. 1995;141:1619-32.

6. Charlesworth D. Balancing selection and its effects on sequences in nearby genome regions. PLoS Genet. 2006;2:379-84.

7. Fijarczyk A, Babik W. Detecting balancing selection in genomes: limits and prospects. Mol Ecol. 2015;24:3529-45.

8. Darwin C. On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray; 1859.

9. Darwin C. The variation of animals and plants under domestication, vol. 2. London: John Murray; 1868.

10. Price EO. Behavioral aspects of animal domestication. Q Rev Biol. 1984;59:1-32.

11. Price EO. Behavioral development in animals undergoing domestication. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 1999;65:245-71.

12. Russell N. The wild side of animal domestication. Soc Anim. 2002;10:285-302.

13. Price EO. Animal domestication and behavior. Wallingford: CABI Publishing; 2002.

14. Harris DR. Agriculture, cultivation and domestication: exploring the conceptual framework of early food production. In: Denham TP, Iriarte J, Vrydaghs L, editors. Rethinking agriculture: archaeological and ethnoarchaeological perspectives. New York: Routledge; 2007.

15. La HD. domestication des animaux par les hommes préhistoriques. Paris: Masson; 1992.

16. Mignon-Grasteau S, Boissy A, Bouix J, Faure JM, Fisher AD, Hinch GN, et al. Genetics of adaptation and domestication in livestock. Livest Prod Sci. 2005;93:3-14.

17. Pulcini D, Wheeler PA, Cataudella S, Russo T, Thorgaard GH. Domestication shapes morphology in rainbow trout *Oncorhynchus mykiss*. J Fish Biol. 2013;82:390-407.

18. Milla S, Pasquet A, El Mohajer L, Fontaine P. How domestication alters fish phenotypes. Rev Aquacult. 2021;13:388-405.

19. Wilkins AS, Wrangham RW, Fitch WT. The "domestication syndrome" in mammals: a unified explanation based on neural crest cell behavior and genetics. Genetics. 2014;197:795-808.

20. Dobney K, Larson G. Genetics and animal domestication: new windows on an elusive process. J Zool. 2006;269:261-71.

21. Qanbari S, Simianer H. Mapping signatures of positive selection in the genome of livestock. Livest Sci. 2014;166:133-43.

22. Wright D. The genetic architecture of domestication in animals. Bioinform Biol Insights. 2015;9:11-20.

23. Balon EK. Origin and domestication of the wild carp, *Cyprinus carpio*: from Roman gourmets to the swimming flowers. Aquaculture. 1995;129:3-48.

24. Balon EK. About the oldest domesticates among fishes. J Fish Biol. 2004;65:1-27.

25. Hershberger WK. Genetic variability in rainbow trout populations. Aquaculture. 1992;100:51-71.

26. Gall GAE, Crandell PA. The rainbow trout. Aquaculture. 1992;100:1-10.

27. Teletchea F. Fish domestication: an overview. In Teletchea F, editor. Animal domestication. London: IntechOpen Ltd; 2018.

28. Sun L, Liu S, Wang R, Jiang Y, Zhang Y, Zhang J, et al. Identification and analysis of genome-wide SNPs provide insight into signatures of selection and domestication in channel catfish (*Ictalurus punctatus*). PLoS One. 2014;9: e109666.

29. Mäkinen H, Vasemägi A, McGinnity P, Cross TF, Primmer CR. Population genomic analyses of early-phase Atlantic salmon (*Salmo salar*) domestication/captive breeding. Evol Appl. 2015;8:93-107.

30. Gutierrez AP, Yáñez JM, Davidson WS. Evidence of recent signatures of selection during domestication in an Atlantic salmon population. Mar Genomics. 2016;26:41-50.

31. Liu L, Ang KP, Elliott JA, Kent MP, Lien S, MacDonald D, et al. A genome scan for selection signatures comparing farmed Atlantic salmon with two wild populations: testing colocalization among outlier markers, candidate genes, and quantitative trait loci for production traits. Evol Appl. 2017;10:276-96.

32. Pritchard VL, Mäkinen H, Vähä JP, Erkinoar J, Orell P, Primmer CR. Genomic signatures of fine-scale local selection in Atlantic salmon

suggest involvement of sexual maturation, energy homeostasis and immune defence-related genes. Mol Ecol. 2018;27:2560-75.

33. López ME, Linderoth T, Norris A, Lhorente JP, Neira R, Yáñez JM. Multiple selection signatures in farmed atlantic salmon adapted to different environments across hemispheres. Front Genet. 2019;10:901.

34. Su S, Li H, Du F, Zhang C, Li X, Jing X, et al. Combined QTL and genome scan analyses with the help of 2b-RAD identify growth-associated genetic markers in a new fast-growing carp strain. Front Genet. 2018;9:592.

35. Hong Xia J, Bai Z, Meng Z, Zhang Y, Wang L, Liu F, et al. Signatures of selection in tilapia revealed by whole genome resequencing. Sci Rep. 2015;5:14168.

36. Cádiz MI, López ME, Díaz-Domínguez D, Cáceres G, Yoshida GM, Gomez-Uchida D, et al. Whole genome re-sequencing reveals recent signatures of selection in three strains of farmed Nile tilapia (*Oreo-chromis niloticus*). Sci Rep. 2020;10:11514.

37. Yu X, Setyawan P, Bastiaansen JW, Liu L, Imron I, Groenen MA, et al. Genomic analysis of a Nile tilapia strain selected for salinity tolerance shows signatures of selection and hybridization with blue tilapia (*Oreo-chromis aureus*). Aquaculture. 2022;560:738527.

38. Cádiz MI, López ME, Díaz-Domínguez D, Cáceres G, Marin-Nahuelpi R, Gomez-Uchida D, et al. Detection of selection signatures in the genome of a farmed population of anadromous rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*). Genomics. 2021;113:3395-404.

39. López ME, Cádiz MI, Rondeau EB, Koop BF, Yáñez JM. Detection of selection signatures in farmed coho salmon (*Oncorhynchus kisutch*) using dense genome-wide information. Sci Rep. 2021;11:9685.

40. Baesjou JP, Wellenreuther M. Genomic signatures of domestication selection in the Australasian snapper (*Chrysophrys auratus*). Genes (Basel). 2021;12:1737.

41. Magris G, Marroni F, D'Agaro E, Vischi M, Chiabà C, Scaglione D, et al. ddRAD-seq reveals the genetic structure and detects signals of selection in Italian brown trout. Genet Sel Evol. 2022;54:8.

42. Smith JM, Haigh J. The hitch-hiking effect of a favourable gene. Genet Res. 1974;23:23-35.

43. Pennings PS, Hermisson J. Soft sweeps II—molecular population genetics of adaptation from recurrent mutation or migration. Mol Biol Evol. 2006;23:1076-84.

44. Vitti JJ, Grossman SR, Sabeti PC. Detecting natural selection in genomic data. Ann Rev Genet. 2013;47:97-120.

45. Saravanan KA, Panigrahi M, Kumar H, Bhushan B, Dutt T, Mishra BP. Selection signatures in livestock genome: a review of concepts, approaches and applications. Livest Sci. 2020;241: 104257.

46. McQuillan R, Leutenegger AL, Abdel-Rahman R, Franklin CS, Pericic M, Barac-Lauc L, et al. Runs of homozygosity in European populations. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;83:359-72.

47. Purfield DC, Berry DP, McParland S, Bradley DG. Runs of homozygosity and population history in cattle. BMC Genet. 2012;13:43.

48. Sabeti PC, Reich DE, Higgins JM, Levine HZ, Richter DJ, Schaffner SF, et al. Detecting recent positive selection in the human genome from haplotype structure. Nature. 2002;419:832-7.

49. Dollar AM, Katz M. Rainbow trout brood stocks and strains in American hatcheries as factors in the occurrence of hepatoma. Prog Fish C. 1964;167:174-226.

50. Thorgaard GH. Chromosomal differences among rainbow trout populations. Copeia. 1983;650:662-3.

51. Bean TH. The rainbow trout. First annual report of the Commissioners of Fisheries, game and forest of the State of New York. New York: Wynkoop Hallenbeck Crawford Co.; 1895. p135-140.

52. Martínez A, Garza JC, Pearse DE. A microsatellite genome screen identifies chromosomal regions under differential selection in steelhead and rainbow trout. Trans Am Fish Soc. 2011;140:829-42.

53. Limborg MT, Blankenship SM, Young SF, Utter FM, Seeb LW, Hansen MH, et al. Signatures of natural selection among lineages and habitats in *Oncorhynchus mykiss*. Ecol Evol. 2012;2:1-18.

54. Weinstein SY, Thrower FP, Nichols KM, Hale MC. A large-scale chromosomal inversion is not associated with life history development in rainbow trout from Southeast Alaska. PLoS One. 2019;14: e0223018.

55. Bernard M, Dehaullon A, Gao G, Paul K, Lagarde H, Charles M, et al. Development of a high-density 665k SNP array for rainbow trout genome-wide genotyping. Front Genet. 2022;13:941340.
56. Bruford MW, Bradley DG, Luikart G. DNA markers reveal the complexity of livestock domestication. Nat Rev Genet. 2003;4:900-10.

57. Yáñez JM, Xu P, Carvalheiro R, Hayes B. Genomics applied to livestock and aquaculture breeding. Evol Appl. 2022;15:517-22.

58. Gao G, Nome T, Pearse DE, Moen T, Naish KA, Thorgaard GH, et al. A new single nucleotide polymorphism database for rainbow trout generated through whole genome resequencing. Front Genet. 2018;9:147.

59. D'Ambrosio J, Phocas F, Haffray P, Bestin A, Brard-Fudulea S, Poncet C, et al. Genome-wide estimates of genetic diversity, inbreeding and effective size of experimental and commercial rainbow trout lines undergoing selective breeding. Genet Sel Evol. 2019;51:26.

60. Gao G, Magadan S, Waldbieser GC, Youngblood RC, Wheeler PA, Scheffler BE, et al. A long reads-based de-novo assembly of the genome of the Arlee homozygous line reveals chromosomal rearrangements in rainbow trout. G3 (Bethesda). 2021;11:jkab052.

61. Chang CC, Chow CC, Tellier LC, Vattikuti S, Purcell SM, Lee JJ. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience. 2015;4:7.

62. Danecek P, Auton A, Abecasis G, Albers CA, Banks E, DePristo MA, et al. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics. 2011;27:2156-8.

63. Jombart T, Ahmed I. Adegenet 1.3-1: new tools for the analysis of genome-wide SNP data. Bioinformatics. 2011;27:3070-1.

64. Nothnagel M, Lu TT, Kayser M, Krawczak M. Genomic and geographic distribution of SNP-defined runs of homozygosity in Europeans. Hum Mol Genet. 2010;19:2927-35.

65. Saravanan KA, Panigrahi M, Kumar H, Parida S, Bhushan B, Gaur GK, et al. Genomic scans for selection signatures revealed candidate genes for adaptation and production traits in a variety of cattle breeds. Genomics. 2021;113:955-63.

66. Purfield DC, McParland S, Wall E, Berry DP. The distribution of runs of homozygosity and selection signatures in six commercial meat sheep breeds. PLoS One. 2017;12: e0176780.

67. Mastrangelo S, Tolone M, Sardina MT, Sottile G, Sutera AM, Di Ger-lando R, et al. Genome-wide scan for runs of homozygosity identifies potential candidate genes associated with local adaptation in Valle del Belice sheep. Genet Sel Evol. 2017;49:84.

68. Zhang Z, Zhang Q, Xiao Q, Sun H, Gao H, Yang Y, et al. Distribution of runs of homozygosity in Chinese and Western pig breeds evaluated by reduced-representation sequencing data. Anim Genet. 2018;49:579-91.

69. Peripolli E, Stafuzzo NB, Munari DP, Lima ALF, Irgang R, Machado MA, et al. Assessment of runs of homozygosity islands and estimates of genomic inbreeding in Gyr (Bos indicus) dairy cattle. BMC Genomics. 2018;19:34.

70. Grilz-Seger G, Mesarič M, Cotman M, Neuditschko M, Druml T, Brem G. Runs of homozygosity and population history of three horse breeds with small population size. J Eq Vet Sci. 2018;71:27-34.

71. Gorssen W, Meyermans R, Janssens S, Buys N. A publicly available repository of ROH islands reveals signatures of selection in different livestock and pet species. Genet Sel Evol. 2021;53:2.

72. Illa SK, Mumtaz S, Mukherjee S, Nath S, Mukherjee A. Genome-wide evaluation of runs of homozygosity in Indian Sahiwal cattle. In: Proceedings of the 12th World Congress on Genetic Applied to Livestock: 3-8 July 2022; Rotterdam. 2022.

73. Szpiech ZA, Xu J, Pemberton TJ, Peng W, Zöllner S, Rosenberg NA, et al. Long runs of homozygosity are enriched for deleterious variation. Am J Hum Genet. 2013;93:90-102.

74. Voight BF, Kudaravalli S, Wen X, Pritchard JK. A map of recent positive selection in the human genome. PLoS Biol. 2006;4: e72.

75. Sargolzaei M, Chesnais JP, Schenkel FS. A new approach for efficient genotype imputation using information from relatives. BMC Genomics. 2014;15:478.

76. Prchal M, D'Ambrosio J, Lagarde H, Lallias D, Patrice P, François Y, et al. Genome-wide association study and genomic prediction of tolerance to acute hypoxia in rainbow trout. Aquaculture. 2022;565: 739068.

77. Lagarde H, Lallias D, Patrice P, Prchal M, François Y, D'Ambrosio J, et al. Genetic architecture of acute hyperthermia resistance in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and genetic correlations with production traits. Genet Sel Evol. 2023;55:39.

78. Paul K, Pelissier P, Goardon L, Dechamp N, Danon J, Jaffrelo L, et al. Maternal and genetic effects on embryonic survival from fertilization to swim up stage and reproductive success in a farmed rainbow trout line. Aquac Rep. 2023;29: 101523.

79. Palti Y, Gao G, Liu S, Kent MP, Lien S, Miller MR, et al. The development and characterization of a 57 K single nucleotide polymorphism array for rainbow trout. Mol Ecol Resour. 2015;15:662-72.

80. Gautier M, Vitalis R. rehh: an R package to detect footprints of selection in genome-wide SNP data from haplotype structure. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:1176-7.

81. Gautier M, Klassmann A, Vitalis R. rehh 2.0: a reimplementation of the R package rehh to detect positive selection from haplotype structure. Mol Ecol Resour. 2017;17:78-90.

82. Sabeti PC, Varilly P, Fry B, Lohmueller J, Hostetter E, Cotsapas C, et al. Genome-wide detection and characterization of positive selection in human populations. Nature. 2007;449:913-8.

83. Bahbahani H, Clifford H, Wragg D, Mbole-Kariuki MN, Van Tassell C, Sonstegard T, et al. Signatures of positive selection in East African Shorthorn Zebu: a genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism analysis. Sci Rep. 2015;5:11729.

84. Raudvere U, Kolberg L, Kuzmin I, Arak T, Adler P, Peterson H, et al. g:Profiler: a web server for functional enrichment analysis and conversions of gene lists (2019 update). Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47:W191-8.

85. Liu T, Elmquist JK, Williams KW. Mrap2: an accessory protein linked to obesity. Cell Metab. 2013;18:309-11.

86. Zhu M, Xu B, Wang M, Liu S, Zhang Y, Zhang C. Pharmacological modulation of MRAP2 protein on melanocortin receptors in the sea lamprey. Endocr Connect. 2019;8:378-88.

87. Wen ZY, Liu T, Qin CJ, Zou YC, Wang J, Li R, et al. MRAP2 interaction with melanocortin-4 receptor in snakehead (Channa argus). Biomolecules. 2021;11:481.

88. Wang WJ, Tay HG, Soni R, Perumal GS, Goll MG, Macaluso FP, et al. CEP162 is an axoneme-recognition protein promoting ciliary transition zone assembly by the cilia base. Nat Cell Biol. 2013;15:591-601.

89. Purcell R. Activation and regulation of the brain-expressed adhesion G protein-coupled receptors ADGRB1/BAI1 and ADGRB2/BAI2: Implications for human disease. PhD thesis, University of Emory. 2017.

90. Cazorla-Vázquez S, Engel FB. Adhesion GPCRs in kidney development and disease. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2018;6:9.

91. Shiu FH, Wong JC, Yamamoto T, Lala T, Purcell RH, Owino S, et al. Mice lacking full length Adgrb1 (Bai1) exhibit social deficits, increased seizure susceptibility, and altered brain development. Exp Neurol. 2022;351: 113994.

92. Fromer M, Roussos P, Sieberts SK, Johnson JS, Kavanagh DH, Perumal TM, et al. Gene expression elucidates functional impact of polygenic risk for schizophrenia. Nat Neurosci. 2016;19:1442-53.

93. Repo H, Gurvits N, Löyttyniemi E, Nykänen M, Lintunen M, Karra H, et al. PTTG1-interacting protein (PTTG1IP/PBF) predicts breast cancer survival. BMC Cancer. 2017;17:705.

94. Margarit E, Armas P, Siburu NG, Calcaterra CN. CNBP modulates the transcription of Wnt signaling pathway components. Biochim Biophys Acta Gene Regul Mech. 2014;1839:1151-60.

95. Yin X, Huo Z, Yan S, Wang Z, Yang T, Wu H, et al. MiR-205 inhibits sporadic vestibular schwannoma cell proliferation by targeting cyclin-dependent kinase 14. World Neurosurg. 2021;147:e25-31.

96. Hiatt SM, Thompson ML, Prokop JW, Lawlor JM, Gray DE, Bebin EM, et al. Deleterious variation in brsk2 associates with a neurodevelopmental disorder. Am J Hum Genet. 2019;104:701-8.

97. Deng J, Wang Y, Hu M, Lin J, Li Q, Liu C, et al. Deleterious variation in BR serine/threonine kinase 2 classified a subtype of autism. Front Mol Neurosci. 2022;15: 904935.

98. Liu Y, Wang Y, Li N, Jiang S. Avobenzone and nanoplastics affect the development of zebrafish nervous system and retinal system and inhibit their locomotor behavior. Sci Total Environ. 2022;806: 150681.

99. Lesk FC, Holloway BA, Wang H, Mullins MC, Kazanietz MG. The zebrafish homologue of mammalian chimerin Rac-GAPs is implicated in epiboly progression during development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:5373-8.

100. Miyake N, Chilton J, Psatha M, Cheng L, Andrews C, Chan WM, et al. Human CHN1 mutations hyperactivate α2-chimaerin and cause Duane's retraction syndrome. Science. 2008;321:839-43.
56. Bruford MW, Bradley DG, Luikart G. DNA markers reveal the complexity of livestock domestication. Nat Rev Genet. 2003;4:900-10.

57. Yáñez JM, Xu P, Carvalheiro R, Hayes B. Genomics applied to livestock and aquaculture breeding. Evol Appl. 2022;15:517-22.

58. Gao G, Nome T, Pearse DE, Moen T, Naish KA, Thorgaard GH, et al. A new single nucleotide polymorphism database for rainbow trout generated through whole genome resequencing. Front Genet. 2018;9:147.

59. D'Ambrosio J, Phocas F, Haffray P, Bestin A, Brard-Fudulea S, Poncet C, et al. Genome-wide estimates of genetic diversity, inbreeding and effective size of experimental and commercial rainbow trout lines undergoing selective breeding. Genet Sel Evol. 2019;51:26.

60. Gao G, Magadan S, Waldbieser GC, Youngblood RC, Wheeler PA, Scheffler BE, et al. A long reads-based de-novo assembly of the genome of the Arlee homozygous line reveals chromosomal rearrangements in rainbow trout. G3 (Bethesda). 2021;11:jkab052.

61. Chang CC, Chow CC, Tellier LC, Vattikuti S, Purcell SM, Lee JJ. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience. 2015;4:7.

62. Danecek P, Auton A, Abecasis G, Albers CA, Banks E, DePristo MA, et al. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics. 2011;27:2156-8.

63. Jombart T, Ahmed I. Adegenet 1.3–1: new tools for the analysis of genome-wide SNP data. Bioinformatics. 2011;27:3070-1.

64. Nothnagel M, Lu TT, Kayser M, Krawczak M. Genomic and geographic distribution of SNP-defined runs of homozygosity in Europeans. Hum Mol Genet. 2010;19:2927-35.

65. Saravanan KA, Panigrahi M, Kumar H, Parida S, Bhushan B, Gaur GK, et al. Genomic scans for selection signatures revealed candidate genes for adaptation and production traits in a variety of cattle breeds. Genomics. 2021;113:955-63.

66. Purfield DC, McParland S, Wall E, Berry DP. The distribution of runs of homozygosity and selection signatures in six commercial meat sheep breeds. PLoS One. 2017;12: e0176780.

67. Mastrangelo S, Tolone M, Sardina MT, Sottile G, Sutera AM, Di Ger-lando R, et al. Genome-wide scan for runs of homozygosity identifies potential candidate genes associated with local adaptation in Valle del Belice sheep. Genet Sel Evol. 2017;49:84.

68. Zhang Z, Zhang Q, Xiao Q, Sun H, Gao H, Yang Y, et al. Distribution of runs of homozygosity in Chinese and Western pig breeds evaluated by reduced-representation sequencing data. Anim Genet. 2018;49:579-91.

69. Peripolli E, Stafuzzo NB, Munari DP, Lima ALF, Irgang R, Machado MA, et al. Assessment of runs of homozygosity islands and estimates of genomic inbreeding in Gyr (Bos indicus) dairy cattle. BMC Genomics. 2018;19:34.

70. Grilz-Seger G, Mesarič M, Cotman M, Neuditschko M, Druml T, Brem G. Runs of homozygosity and population history of three horse breeds with small population size. J Eq Vet Sci. 2018;71:27-34.

71. Gorssen W, Meyermans R, Janssens S, Buys N. A publicly available repository of ROH islands reveals signatures of selection in different livestock and pet species. Genet Sel Evol. 2021;53:2.

72. Illa SK, Mumtaz S, Mukherjee S, Nath S, Mukherjee A. Genome-wide evaluation of runs of homozygosity in Indian Sahiwal cattle. In: Proceedings of the 12th World Congress on Genetic Applied to Livestock: 3-8 July 2022; Rotterdam. 2022.

73. Szpiech ZA, Xu J, Pemberton TJ, Peng W, Zöllner S, Rosenberg NA, et al. Long runs of homozygosity are enriched for deleterious variation. Am J Hum Genet. 2013;93:90-102.

74. Voight BF, Kudaravalli S, Wen X, Pritchard JK. A map of recent positive selection in the human genome. PLoS Biol. 2006;4: e72.

75. Sargolzaei M, Chesnais JP, Schenkel FS. A new approach for efficient genotype imputation using information from relatives. BMC Genomics. 2014;15:478.

76. Prchal M, D'Ambrosio J, Lagarde H, Lallias D, Patrice P, François Y, et al. Genome-wide association study and genomic prediction of tolerance to acute hypoxia in rainbow trout. Aquaculture. 2022;565: 739068.

77. Lagarde H, Lallias D, Patrice P, Prchal M, François Y, D'Ambrosio J, et al. Genetic architecture of acute hyperthermia resistance in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and genetic correlations with production traits. Genet Sel Evol. 2023;55:39.

78. Paul K, Pelissier P, Goardon L, Dechamp N, Danon J, Jaffrelo L, et al. Maternal and genetic effects on embryonic survival from fertilization to swim up stage and reproductive success in a farmed rainbow trout line. Aquac Rep. 2023;29: 101523.

79. Palti Y, Gao G, Liu S, Kent MP, Lien S, Miller MR, et al. The development and characterization of a 57 K single nucleotide polymorphism array for rainbow trout. Mol Ecol Resour. 2015;15:662-72.

80. Gautier M, Vitalis R. rehh: an R package to detect footprints of selection in genome-wide SNP data from haplotype structure. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:1176-7.

81. Gautier M, Klassmann A, Vitalis R. rehh 2.0: a reimplementation of the R package rehh to detect positive selection from haplotype structure. Mol Ecol Resour. 2017;17:78-90.

82. Sabeti PC, Varilly P, Fry B, Lohmueller J, Hostetter E, Cotsapas C, et al. Genome-wide detection and characterization of positive selection in human populations. Nature. 2007;449:913-8.

83. Bahbahani H, Clifford H, Wragg D, Mbole-Kariuki MN, Van Tassell C, Sonstegard T, et al. Signatures of positive selection in East African Shorthorn Zebu: a genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism analysis. Sci Rep. 2015;5:11729.

84. Raudvere U, Kolberg L, Kuzmin I, Arak T, Adler P, Peterson H, et al. g:Profiler: a web server for functional enrichment analysis and conversions of gene lists (2019 update). Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47:W191-8.

85. Liu T, Elmquist JK, Williams KW. Mrap2: an accessory protein linked to obesity. Cell Metab. 2013;18:309-11.

86. Zhu M, Xu B, Wang M, Liu S, Zhang Y, Zhang C. Pharmacological modulation of MRAP2 protein on melanocortin receptors in the sea lamprey. Endocr Connect. 2019;8:378-88.

87. Wen ZY, Liu T, Qin CJ, Zou YC, Wang J, Li R, et al. MRAP2 interaction with melanocortin-4 receptor in snakehead (Channa argus). Biomolecules. 2021;11:481.

88. Wang WJ, Tay HG, Soni R, Perumal GS, Goll MG, Macaluso FP, et al. CEP162 is an axoneme-recognition protein promoting ciliary transition zone assembly by the cilia base. Nat Cell Biol. 2013;15:591-601.

89. Purcell R. Activation and regulation of the brain-expressed adhesion G protein-coupled receptors ADGRB1/BAI1 and ADGRB2/BAI2: Implications for human disease. PhD thesis, University of Emory. 2017.

90. Cazorla-Vázquez S, Engel FB. Adhesion GPCRs in kidney development and disease. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2018;6:9.

91. Shiu FH, Wong JC, Yamamoto T, Lala T, Purcell RH, Owino S, et al. Mice lacking full length Adgrb1 (Bai1) exhibit social deficits, increased seizure susceptibility, and altered brain development. Exp Neurol. 2022;351: 113994.

92. Fromer M, Roussos P, Sieberts SK, Johnson JS, Kavanagh DH, Perumal TM, et al. Gene expression elucidates functional impact of polygenic risk for schizophrenia. Nat Neurosci. 2016;19:1442-53.

93. Repo H, Gurvits N, Löyttyniemi E, Nykänen M, Lintunen M, Karra H, et al. PTTG1-interacting protein (PTTG1IP/PBF) predicts breast cancer survival. BMC Cancer. 2017;17:705.

94. Margarit E, Armas P, Siburu NG, Calcaterra CN. CNBP modulates the transcription of Wnt signaling pathway components. Biochim Biophys Acta Gene Regul Mech. 2014;1839:1151-60.

95. Yin X, Huo Z, Yan S, Wang Z, Yang T, Wu H, et al. MiR-205 inhibits sporadic vestibular schwannoma cell proliferation by targeting cyclin-dependent kinase 14. World Neurosurg. 2021;147:e25-31.

96. Hiatt SM, Thompson ML, Prokop JW, Lawlor JM, Gray DE, Bebin EM, et al. Deleterious variation in brsk2 associates with a neurodevelopmental disorder. Am J Hum Genet. 2019;104:701-8.

97. Deng J, Wang Y, Hu M, Lin J, Li Q, Liu C, et al. Deleterious variation in BR serine/threonine kinase 2 classified a subtype of autism. Front Mol Neurosci. 2022;15: 904935.

98. Liu Y, Wang Y, Li N, Jiang S. Avobenzone and nanoplastics affect the development of zebrafish nervous system and retinal system and inhibit their locomotor behavior. Sci Total Environ. 2022;806: 150681.

99. Lesk FC, Holloway BA, Wang H, Mullins MC, Kazanietz MG. The zebrafish homologue of mammalian chimerin Rac-GAPs is implicated in epiboly progression during development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:5373-8.

100. Miyake N, Chilton J, Psatha M, Cheng L, Andrews C, Chan WM, et al. Human CHN1 mutations hyperactivate α2-chimaerin and cause Duane's retraction syndrome. Science. 2008;321:839-43.
101. Ip JP, Shi L, Chen Y, Itoh Y, Fu WY, Betz A, et al. α2-chimaerin controls neuronal migration and functioning of the cerebral cortex through CRMP-2. *Nat Neurosci.* 2012;15:39–47.

102. Palmer CS, Osellame LD, Stojanovski D, Ryan MT. The regulation of mitochondrial morphology: intricate mechanisms and dynamic machinery. *Cell Signal.* 2011;23:1534–45.

103. Miller TE, Henkels KM, Huddleston M, Salisbury R, Hussain SM, Sasaki AT, et al. Depletion of phosphatidylinositol 4-phosphate at the Golgi translocates K-Ras to mitochondria. *J Cell Sci.* 2019;132:jcs231886.

104. Wang Y, Miao X, Li H, Su P, Lin L, Liu L, et al. The correlated expression of immune and energy metabolism related genes in the response to *Salmonella enterica* serovar Enteritidis inoculation in chicken. *BMC Vet Res.* 2020;16:257.

105. Capalbo G, Müller-Kuller T, Dietrich U, Hoelzer D, Ottmann OG, Scheuring UJ. Inhibition of X4-tropic HIV type 1 replication by knock-down of the cellular protein LEREPO4. *AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2010;26:1155–61.

106. Li Q, Hou J, Guo C, Zhang Y, Liu L, Hu H, et al. ZC3H15 correlates with a poor prognosis and tumor progression in melanoma. *BioMed Res Int.* 2021;2021:8305299.

107. Wassarman PM, Litscher ES. The mouse egg's zona pellucida. *Curr Top Dev Biol.* 2018;130:331–56.

108. Li H, Zhu Q, Chen R, Liu M, Xu D. Identification and characterization of dimorphic expression of sex-related genes in Rock Bream, a fish with multiple sex chromosomes. *Front Genet.* 2021;12:1791179.

109. Torky HA, Sherif A, Abo-Louz A, Ali M, Ahmed A, Ali A. Evaluation of serum nidogen-2 as a screening and diagnostic tool for ovarian cancer. *Gynecol Obstet Invest.* 2018;83:461–5.

110. Zhang JL, Richetti S, Ramezani T, Welcker D, Lütke S, Pogoda HM, et al. Vertebrate extracellular matrix protein hemicentin-1 interacts physically and genetically with basement membrane protein nidogen-2. *Matrix Biol.* 2022;112:132–54.

111. Shive HR, West RR, Embree LJ, Azuma M, Sood R, Liu P, et al. brca2 in zebrafish ovarian development, spermatogenesis, and tumorigenesis. *Proc Natl Acad Sci USA.* 2010;107:19350–5.

112. Rodríguez-Marí A, Wilson C, Titus TA, Canestro C, BreMiller RA, Yan YL, et al. Roles of brca2 (fancd1) in oocyte nuclear architecture, game-togenesis, gonad tumors, and genome stability in zebrafish. *PLoS Genet.* 2011;7:e1001357.

113. Moynahan ME, Pierce AJ, Jasin M. BRCA2 is required for homology-directed repair of chromosomal breaks. *Mol Cell.* 2001;7:263–72.

114. Chen CC, Feng W, Lim PX, Kass EM, Jasin M. Homology-directed repair and the role of BRCA1, BRCA2, and related proteins in genome integrity and cancer. *Annu Rev Cancer Biol.* 2018;2:313–36.

115. Cumer T, Boyer F, Pompanon F. Genome-wide detection of structural variations reveals new regions associated with domestication in small ruminants. *Genome Biol Evol.* 2021;13:evab165.

116. López ME, Benestan L, Moore JS, Perrier C, Gilbey J, Di Genova A, et al. Comparing genomic signatures of domestication in two Atlantic salmon (*Salmo salar* L.) populations with different geographical origins. *Evol Appl.* 2018;12:137–56.

117. Wang H, Teng M, Liu P, Zhao M, Wang S, Hu J, et al. Selection signatures of Pacific White Shrimp *Litopenaeus vannamei* revealed by whole-genome resequencing analysis. *Front Mar Sci.* 2022;9:844597.

118. Wayne RK, Vonholdt BM. Evolutionary genomics of dog domestication. *Mamm Genome.* 2012;23:3–18.

119. Naval-Sanchez M, McWilliam S, Evans B, Yáñez JM, Houston RD, Kijas JW. Changed patterns of genomic variation following recent domestication: selection sweeps in farmed Atlantic salmon. *Front Genet.* 2020;11:264.

120. Signer-Hasler H, Henkel J, Bangerter E, Bulut Z, Drögemüller C, Leeb T, et al. Runs of homozygosity in Swiss goats reveal genetic changes associated with domestication and modern selection. *Genet Sel Evol.* 2022;54:6.

121. Hou Y, Bickhart DM, Chung H, Hutchison JL, Norman HD, Connor EE, et al. Analysis of copy number variations in Holstein cows identify potential mechanisms contributing to differences in residual feed intake. * Funct Integr Genomics.* 2012;12:717–23.

122. Gibbs RA, Taylor JF, Van Tassell CP, Barendse W, Eversole KA, Bovine Hap-Map Consortium, et al. Genome-wide survey of SNP variation uncovers the genetic structure of cattle breeds. *Science.* 2009;324:528–32.

123. Uvarov P, Kajander T, Airaksinen MS. Origin and loss of nested LRRTM/α-catenin genes during vertebrate evolution. *PLoS One* 2014;9: e89910.

124. Li Z, Tian Y, Wang L, Li Z, Chen S, Li L, et al. Comparative transcriptomics analyses and revealing candidate networks and genes involved in lordosis of the Yunlong grouper (*Epinephelus moara*♀×*Epinephelus lanceolatus*♂). *Aquaculture.* 2022;550: 737866.

125. Ding Y, Wang W, Ma D, Liang G, Kang Z, Xue Y, et al. Smarca5-mediated epigenetic programming facilitates fetal HSPC development in vertebrates. *Blood.* 2021;137:190–202.

126. Limi S, Senecal A, Coleman R, Lopez-Jones M, Guo P, Polumbo C, et al. Transcriptional burst fraction and size dynamics during lens fiber cell differentiation and detailed insights into the denucleation process. *J Biol Chem.* 2018;293:13176–90.

127. Armas P, Margarit E, Mouguelar VS, Allende ML, Calcaterra NB. Beyond the binding site: in vivo identification of tbx2, smarca5 and wnt5b as molecular targets of CNBP during embryonic development. *PLoS One.* 2013;8: e63234.

128. Gautier P, Naranjo-Golborne C, Taylor MS, Jackson IJ, Smyth I. Expression of the fras1/frem gene family during zebrafish development and fin morphogenesis. *Dev Dyn.* 2008;237:3295–304.

129. DeCarvalho AC, Cappendijk SL, Fadool JM. Developmental expression of the POU domain transcription factor Brn-3b (Pou4f2) in the lateral line and visual system of zebrafish. *Dev Dyn.* 2004;229:869–76.

130. Maskell LJ, Qamar K, Babakr AA, Hawkins TA, Heads RJ, Budhram-Mahadeo VS. Essential but partially redundant roles for POU4F1/Brn-3a and POU4F2/Brn-3b transcription factors in the developing heart. *Cell Death Dis.* 2017;8: e2861.

131. Berthelot C, Brunet F, Chalopin D, Juanchich A, Bernard M, Noël B, et al. The rainbow trout genome provides novel insights into evolution after whole-genome duplication in vertebrates. *Nat Commun.* 2014;5:3657.

132. Pearse DE, Barson NJ, Nome T, Gao G, Campbell MA, Abadía-Cardoso A, et al. Sex-dependent dominance maintains migration supergene in Rainbow trout. *Nat Ecol Evol.* 2019;1731:1742–3.

133. Gross R, Lulla P, Paaver T. Genetic variability and differentiation of rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*) strains in northern and Eastern Europe. *Aquaculture.* 2007;272:5139–46.

134. Silverstein JT, Rexroad CE III, King TL. Genetic variation measured by microsatellites among three strains of domesticated rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*, Walbaum). *Aquac Res.* 2004;35:40–8.

135. Liu S, Palti Y, Martin KE, Parsons JE, Rexroad CE III. Assessment of genetic differentiation and genetic assignment of commercial rainbow trout strains using a SNP panel. *Aquaculture.* 2017;468:120–5.

136. Stanković D, Crivelli AJ, Snoj A. Rainbow trout in Europe: introduction, naturalization, and impacts. *Rev Fish Sci Aquac.* 2015;23:39–71.

137. Walters KB, Dodd ME, Mathias JR, Gallagher AJ, Bennin DA, Rhodes J, et al. Muscle degeneration and leukocyte infiltration caused by mutation of zebrafish Fad24. *Dev Dyn.* 2009;238:86–99.

138. Zhou W, Hildebrandt F. Molecular cloning and expression of phospholipase C epsilon 1 in zebrafish. *Gene Expr Patterns.* 2009;9:282–8.

139. Hedrick PW. Heterozygote advantage: the effect of artificial selection in livestock and pets. *J Hered.* 2015;106:141–54.

140. Georges M, Charlier C, Hayes B. Harnessing genomic information for livestock improvement. *Nat Rev Genet.* 2019;20:135–56.

141. Seo J, Asaoka Y, Nagai Y, Hirayama J, Yamasaki T, Namae M, et al. Negative regulation of wnt11 expression by Jnk signaling during zebrafish gastrulation. *J Cell Biochem.* 2010;110:1022–37.

142. Zheng T, Song Z, Tao Y, Qiang J, Ma J, Lu S, et al. Transport stress induces innate immunity responses through TLR and NLR signaling pathways and increases mucus cell number in gills of hybrid yellow catfish (*Tachysurus fulvidraco*♀×*Pseudobagrus vachellii*♂). *Fish Shellfish Immunol.* 2022;127:166–75.

143. Gu L, Wu Y, Hu S, Chen Q, Tan J, Yan Y, et al. Analysis of association between MAP2K4 gene polymorphism rs3826392 and IL-1b serum level in southern Chinese Han Ischemic Stroke patients. *J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis.* 2016;25:1096–101.

144. Klein J, Sato A, Nagl S, O'hUigín C. Molecular trans-species polymorphism. *Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst.* 1998;29:1–21.

145. Ferrer-Admetlla A, Bosch E, Sikora M, Marquès-Bonet T, Ramírez-Soriano A, Muntasell A, et al. Balancing selection is the main force shaping the evolution of innate immunity genes. *J Immunol.* 2008;181:1315–22.
101. Ip JP, Shi L, Chen Y, Itoh Y, Fu WY, Betz A, et al. α2-chimaerin controls neuronal migration and functioning of the cerebral cortex through CRMP-2. *Nat Neurosci.* 2012;15:39–47.

102. Palmer CS, Osellame LD, Stojanovski D, Ryan MT. The regulation of mitochondrial morphology: intricate mechanisms and dynamic machinery. *Cell Signal.* 2011;23:1534–45.

103. Miller TE, Henkels KM, Huddleston M, Salisbury R, Hussain SM, Sasaki AT, et al. Depletion of phosphatidylinositol 4-phosphate at the Golgi translocates K-Ras to mitochondria. *J Cell Sci.* 2019;132:jcs231886.

104. Wang Y, Miao X, Li H, Su P, Lin L, Liu L, et al. The correlated expression of immune and energy metabolism related genes in the response to *Salmonella enterica* serovar Enteritidis inoculation in chicken. *BMC Vet Res.* 2020;16:257.

105. Capalbo G, Müller-Kuller T, Dietrich U, Hoelzer D, Ottmann OG, Scheuring UJ. Inhibition of X4-tropic HIV type 1 replication by knock-down of the cellular protein LEREPO4. *AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2010;26:1155–61.

106. Li Q, Hou J, Guo C, Zhang Y, Liu L, Hu H, et al. ZC3H15 correlates with a poor prognosis and tumor progression in melanoma. *BioMed Res Int.* 2021;2021:8305299.

107. Wassarman PM, Litscher ES. The mouse egg's zona pellucida. *Curr Top Dev Biol.* 2018;130:331–56.

108. Li H, Zhu Q, Chen R, Liu M, Xu D. Identification and characterization of dimorphic expression of sex-related genes in Rock Bream, a fish with multiple sex chromosomes. *Front Genet.* 2021;12:1791179.

109. Torky HA, Sherif A, Abo-Louz A, Ali M, Ahmed A, Ali A. Evaluation of serum nidogen-2 as a screening and diagnostic tool for ovarian cancer. *Gynecol Obstet Invest.* 2018;83:461–5.

110. Zhang JL, Richetti S, Ramezani T, Welcker D, Lütke S, Pogoda HM, et al. Vertebrate extracellular matrix protein hemicentin-1 interacts physically and genetically with basement membrane protein nidogen-2. *Matrix Biol.* 2022;112:132–54.

111. Shive HR, West RR, Embree LJ, Azuma M, Sood R, Liu P, et al. brca2 in zebrafish ovarian development, spermatogenesis, and tumorigenesis. *Proc Natl Acad Sci USA.* 2010;107:19350–5.

112. Rodríguez-Marí A, Wilson C, Titus TA, Canestro C, BreMiller RA, Yan YL, et al. Roles of brca2 (fancd1) in oocyte nuclear architecture, game-togenesis, gonad tumors, and genome stability in zebrafish. *PLoS Genet.* 2011;7:e1001357.

113. Moynahan ME, Pierce AJ, Jasin M. BRCA2 is required for homology-directed repair of chromosomal breaks. *Mol Cell.* 2001;7:263–72.

114. Chen CC, Feng W, Lim PX, Kass EM, Jasin M. Homology-directed repair and the role of BRCA1, BRCA2, and related proteins in genome integrity and cancer. *Annu Rev Cancer Biol.* 2018;2:313–36.

115. Cumer T, Boyer F, Pompanon F. Genome-wide detection of structural variations reveals new regions associated with domestication in small ruminants. *Genome Biol Evol.* 2021;13:evab165.

116. López ME, Benestan L, Moore JS, Perrier C, Gilbey J, Di Genova A, et al. Comparing genomic signatures of domestication in two Atlantic salmon (*Salmo salar* L.) populations with different geographical origins. *Evol Appl.* 2018;12:137–56.

117. Wang H, Teng M, Liu P, Zhao M, Wang S, Hu J, et al. Selection signatures of Pacific White Shrimp *Litopenaeus vannamei* revealed by whole-genome resequencing analysis. *Front Mar Sci.* 2022;9:844597.

118. Wayne RK, Vonholdt BM. Evolutionary genomics of dog domestication. *Mamm Genome.* 2012;23:3–18.

119. Naval-Sanchez M, McWilliam S, Evans B, Yáñez JM, Houston RD, Kijas JW. Changed patterns of genomic variation following recent domestication: selection sweeps in farmed Atlantic salmon. *Front Genet.* 2020;11:264.

120. Signer-Hasler H, Henkel J, Bangerter E, Bulut Z, Drögemüller C, Leeb T, et al. Runs of homozygosity in Swiss goats reveal genetic changes associated with domestication and modern selection. *Genet Sel Evol.* 2022;54:6.

121. Hou Y, Bickhart DM, Chung H, Hutchison JL, Norman HD, Connor EE, et al. Analysis of copy number variations in Holstein cows identify potential mechanisms contributing to differences in residual feed intake. * Funct Integr Genomics.* 2012;12:717–23.

122. Gibbs RA, Taylor JF, Van Tassell CP, Barendse W, Eversole KA, Bovine Hap-Map Consortium, et al. Genome-wide survey of SNP variation uncovers the genetic structure of cattle breeds. *Science.* 2009;324:528–32.

123. Uvarov P, Kajander T, Airaksinen MS. Origin and loss of nested LRRTM/α-catenin genes during vertebrate evolution. *PLoS One* 2014;9: e89910.

124. Li Z, Tian Y, Wang L, Li Z, Chen S, Li L, et al. Comparative transcriptomics analyses and revealing candidate networks and genes involved in lordosis of the Yunlong grouper (*Epinephelus moara*♀×*Epinephelus lanceolatus*♂). *Aquaculture.* 2022;550: 737866.

125. Ding Y, Wang W, Ma D, Liang G, Kang Z, Xue Y, et al. Smarca5-mediated epigenetic programming facilitates fetal HSPC development in vertebrates. *Blood.* 2021;137:190–202.

126. Limi S, Senecal A, Coleman R, Lopez-Jones M, Guo P, Polumbo C, et al. Transcriptional burst fraction and size dynamics during lens fiber cell differentiation and detailed insights into the denucleation process. *J Biol Chem.* 2018;293:13176–90.

127. Armas P, Margarit E, Mouguelar VS, Allende ML, Calcaterra NB. Beyond the binding site: in vivo identification of tbx2, smarca5 and wnt5b as molecular targets of CNBP during embryonic development. *PLoS One.* 2013;8: e63234.

128. Gautier P, Naranjo-Golborne C, Taylor MS, Jackson IJ, Smyth I. Expression of the fras1/frem gene family during zebrafish development and fin morphogenesis. *Dev Dyn.* 2008;237:3295–304.

129. DeCarvalho AC, Cappendijk SL, Fadool JM. Developmental expression of the POU domain transcription factor Brn-3b (Pou4f2) in the lateral line and visual system of zebrafish. *Dev Dyn.* 2004;229:869–76.

130. Maskell LJ, Qamar K, Babakr AA, Hawkins TA, Heads RJ, Budhram-Mahadeo VS. Essential but partially redundant roles for POU4F1/Brn-3a and POU4F2/Brn-3b transcription factors in the developing heart. *Cell Death Dis.* 2017;8: e2861.

131. Berthelot C, Brunet F, Chalopin D, Juanchich A, Bernard M, Noël B, et al. The rainbow trout genome provides novel insights into evolution after whole-genome duplication in vertebrates. *Nat Commun.* 2014;5:3657.

132. Pearse DE, Barson NJ, Nome T, Gao G, Campbell MA, Abadía-Cardoso A, et al. Sex-dependent dominance maintains migration supergene in Rainbow trout. *Nat Ecol Evol.* 2019;1731:1742–3.

133. Gross R, Lulla P, Paaver T. Genetic variability and differentiation of rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*) strains in northern and Eastern Europe. *Aquaculture.* 2007;272:5139–46.

134. Silverstein JT, Rexroad CE III, King TL. Genetic variation measured by microsatellites among three strains of domesticated rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*, Walbaum). *Aquac Res.* 2004;35:40–8.

135. Liu S, Palti Y, Martin KE, Parsons JE, Rexroad CE III. Assessment of genetic differentiation and genetic assignment of commercial rainbow trout strains using a SNP panel. *Aquaculture.* 2017;468:120–5.

136. Stanković D, Crivelli AJ, Snoj A. Rainbow trout in Europe: introduction, naturalization, and impacts. *Rev Fish Sci Aquac.* 2015;23:39–71.

137. Walters KB, Dodd ME, Mathias JR, Gallagher AJ, Bennin DA, Rhodes J, et al. Muscle degeneration and leukocyte infiltration caused by mutation of zebrafish Fad24. *Dev Dyn.* 2009;238:86–99.

138. Zhou W, Hildebrandt F. Molecular cloning and expression of phospholipase C epsilon 1 in zebrafish. *Gene Expr Patterns.* 2009;9:282–8.

139. Hedrick PW. Heterozygote advantage: the effect of artificial selection in livestock and pets. *J Hered.* 2015;106:141–54.

140. Georges M, Charlier C, Hayes B. Harnessing genomic information for livestock improvement. *Nat Rev Genet.* 2019;20:135–56.

141. Seo J, Asaoka Y, Nagai Y, Hirayama J, Yamasaki T, Namae M, et al. Negative regulation of wnt11 expression by Jnk signaling during zebrafish gastrulation. *J Cell Biochem.* 2010;110:1022–37.

142. Zheng T, Song Z, Tao Y, Qiang J, Ma J, Lu S, et al. Transport stress induces innate immunity responses through TLR and NLR signaling pathways and increases mucus cell number in gills of hybrid yellow catfish (*Tachysurus fulvidraco*♀×*Pseudobagrus vachellii*♂). *Fish Shellfish Immunol.* 2022;127:166–75.

143. Gu L, Wu Y, Hu S, Chen Q, Tan J, Yan Y, et al. Analysis of association between MAP2K4 gene polymorphism rs3826392 and IL-1b serum level in southern Chinese Han Ischemic Stroke patients. *J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis.* 2016;25:1096–101.

144. Klein J, Sato A, Nagl S, O'hUigín C. Molecular trans-species polymorphism. *Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst.* 1998;29:1–21.

145. Ferrer-Admetlla A, Bosch E, Sikora M, Marquès-Bonet T, Ramírez-Soriano A, Muntasell A, et al. Balancing selection is the main force shaping the evolution of innate immunity genes. *J Immunol.* 2008;181:1315–22.