Next Article in Journal
CRISPR-Cas9 Screening and Simulated Infection Transcriptomic Identify Key Drivers of Innate Immunity in Bactrian Camels
Previous Article in Journal
The Influence of Environmental and Genetic Factors and Training Background on the Welfare of Herding Dogs
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 16
Issue 4
10.3390/ani16040605
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Sex-Specific Marker Development and Identification of an XY Sex Determination System in the Tire Track Eel (Mastacembelus favus) via Whole-Genome Resequencing

by
Linan Zhang
1,
Yiman Chen
1,
Wenshi Zhu
1,
Hao Sheng
1,
Weikai Chen
1,
Haojie Li
1,
Mingxiang Cui
2,
Chong Han
1,* and
Hu Shu
1,*
1
South China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China
2
Guangdong Lianyi Aquatic Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd., Kaiping 529300, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2026, 16(4), 605; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani16040605
Submission received: 17 January 2026 / Revised: 4 February 2026 / Accepted: 9 February 2026 / Published: 14 February 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Animal Genetics and Genomics)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Simple Summary

This study developed a rapid, accurate, and cost-effective genetic sex identification method for the tire track eel (Mastacembelus favus). Whole-genome resequencing identified 69 male-specific genomic regions, from which two PCR-based markers (W5 and W14) were designed. These markers reliably distinguished males and females in genetic sex identification, indicating an XY sex determination system in M. favus. Sequence conservation was further examined by BLAST in the related species Mastacembelus armatus. This work provides practical tools for monosex breeding and advances the understanding of sex determination in Mastacembelus species.

Abstract

The tire track eel (Mastacembelus favus) is a freshwater fish with high economic value and aquaculture potential. However, its sex determination mechanism remains unclear, which limits the development of monosex culture and sex-controlled breeding. To address this, preliminary female and male reference genomes were generated using second-generation sequencing, followed by whole-genome resequencing of four females and four males. Comparative analyses identified 69 male-specific sequences, with a total length of approximately 44.5 kb. Based on these sequences, two PCR-based sex-specific markers (W5 and W14) were developed. Both markers showed complete concordance with phenotypic sex in parental and offspring from controlled crosses populations, providing strong evidence for a male heterogametic (XY) sex determination system in M. favus. Although the markers were not transferable to the closely related species Mastacembelus armatus, the corresponding male-specific sequences exhibited high genomic conservation. In conclusion, this study provides reliable molecular tools for genetic sex identification in M. favus. These tools will support monosex aquaculture and sex-controlled breeding programs, while also offering insights into sex determination and sex chromosome evolution in the genus Mastacembelus.

1. Introduction

Fishes represent the most species-rich and ecologically diverse group of vertebrates, with over 32,000 described species worldwide. Their sex determination systems exhibit remarkable plasticity, diversity, and evolutionary complexity, making them important models for developmental and evolutionary biology [1,2,3,4]. However, in most teleosts, sex chromosomes are still at an early stage of evolution. Distinct sex chromosomes have been identified in only approximately 10% of fish species, and they are predominantly homomorphic, with limited regions of recombination suppression and low levels of structural differentiation [5,6,7]. These characteristics greatly limit the effectiveness of traditional cytogenetic approaches in accurately identifying sex determination systems in fishes.
In many cultured fish species, pronounced sexual size dimorphism (SSD) is observed during some or all life-history stages, resulting in substantial differences between sexes in growth rate, body size, feed conversion efficiency, and reproductive investment [5,8]. For example, males grow significantly faster than females in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) [9], yellow catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco) [10], and zig-zag eel (Mastacembelus armatus) [11]. In contrast, females exhibit superior growth performance in mandarin fish (Siniperca chuatsi) [12], largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) [13], and half-smooth tongue sole (Cynoglossus semilaevis) [14]. Consequently, clarifying sex determination systems and implementing sex-controlled breeding can effectively utilize SSD to enhance overall aquaculture efficiency.
In addition, to enable effective sex-controlled breeding, accurate identification of genetic sex based on molecular markers is essential. The earliest molecular marker technology can be traced back to restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis established by Botstein et al. [15]. Subsequently, a variety of DNA-based marker systems, including random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), were rapidly developed and successfully applied to several economically important aquaculture species, such as Yellow Rivercarps (Cyprinus carpio) [16], turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) [17] and O. niloticus [18], C. semilaevis [19]. These markers enable sex identification through simple PCR-based assays [20,21]. However, traditional marker systems are often characterized by low efficiency, limited reproducibility, and labor-intensive procedures [22].
In recent years, the rapid advancement of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies has greatly facilitated the development of sex-specific molecular markers, which have become indispensable tools in molecular-assisted breeding programs [23,24]. Among these approaches, whole-genome resequencing (WGS re-seq) has emerged as one of the most efficient strategies for developing genetic sex markers due to its high throughput and decreasing costs. By comparing genome-wide sequence differences between females and males, WGS re-seq enables efficient identification of sex-specific sequences, inference of sex determination systems, and localization of sex-determining regions (SDRs) [11,25,26]. Molecular markers developed using this strategy have been successfully applied in multiple fish species, including C. semilaevis [14], snakehead (Channa argus) [27], grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) [28], large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea) [29], mandarin fish (S. chuatsi) [30], striped seabream (Oplegnathus fasciatus) [31], and zig-zag eel (M. armatus) [11].
The tire track eel (M. favus) is a widely distributed species across Thailand, the Lao People’ s Democratic Republic, Cambodia, Vietnam, and the Malay Peninsula, reaching a maximum total length of approximately 70 cm and possessing high economic value due to its superior flesh quality and nutritional content [32,33]. Small-scale aquaculture practices in China and Vietnam have revealed pronounced sexual size dimorphism in this species, with males exhibiting faster growth, higher feed conversion efficiency, greater disease resistance, and larger body size than females [34,35]. These traits indicate the potential advantages of monosex culture in M. favus. However, reliable sex identification based on external morphology is not feasible at early developmental stages [35].
Despite its aquaculture potential, genomic resources for M. favus remain limited. The absence of effective molecular markers for genetic sex identification, together with the unknown sex determination system and sex-determining (SD) genes, constitutes a major bottleneck for large-scale aquaculture development [36,37,38]. Previous studies have shown high cross-species transferability of microsatellite loci between M. favus and the closely related M. armatus [37]. Moreover, their strong morphological and karyotypic similarities have led to occasional misidentification, which may cause irreversible losses of germplasm resources if not properly managed [36].
In this study, WGS re-seq was employed to generate draft genome assemblies of female and male M. favus. Comparative analyses between female and male genomes were conducted to identify sex-specific sequences and develop reliable molecular markers for genetic sex discrimination. The conservation of these sequences and markers was further evaluated in M. armatus. The aims of this study were to: (i) elucidate the sex determination system of M. favus; (ii) develop sex-specific molecular markers to provide technical support for sex-controlled breeding; and (iii) assess variations in sex-determining regions among Mastacembelus species.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sample Collection

Adult M. favus individuals were purchased from Guangdong Lianyi Aquatic Technology Co., Ltd. (Jiangmen, Guangdong Province, China). 24 adults (12 females and 12 males) were randomly selected and dissected for gonadal examination, and sex was determined by visual inspection of the gonads. Caudal fin tissues were collected from each individual and preserved in 95% ethanol for subsequent molecular analyses. The remaining adult M. favus individuals were acclimated to formulated feed and maintained for future breeding experiments.
In addition, 16 wild M. armatus individuals (8 females and 8 males) from the Tanjiang River basin were included for cross-species marker validation.
All animal handling procedures and experimental protocols were approved by the Experimental Animal Ethics Committee of the Guangzhou University of China.

2.2. Breeding of Self-Fertilized Offspring

Artificially fertilized offspring were obtained from known M. favus parents. Spawning was induced by a two-step hormone injection, with hormones fully dissolved in 0.7% physiological saline and injection protocols adapted from M. armatus [39]. Fertilized eggs were treated with red clay to remove adhesiveness and incubated in circulating water at 26–28 °C. Eggs were transferred to hatching ponds at the pre-hatching stage for larval emergence.
During incubation and larval rearing, dissolved oxygen was maintained at 6–10 mg/L, and approximately one-fifth of the water volume was replaced every two days with aerated, filtered water to control ammonia accumulation. Larvae were initially fed Artemia salina, followed by a gradual transition to commercial diets; Limnodilus spp. were avoided to prevent abnormal sex differentiation [40]. At 120 days post-fertilization (dpf), offspring were randomly sampled for sex-specific marker validation.

2.3. Sex Identification of Self-Fertilized Offspring

Gonadal tissues from the 24 (12 females and 12 males) self-fertilized offspring were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 24 h, dehydrated through a graded ethanol series, and embedded in paraffin. Sections of 5–6 µm thickness were prepared, stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and mounted with neutral resin. Phenotypic sex was determined by microscopic examination of the gonadal histology [41].

2.4. DNA Extraction and Library Construction

Genomic DNA was extracted from all samples using a commercial kit (Novizan, Nanjing, China). DNA quality and concentration were assessed by 1.2% agarose gel electrophoresis and a microplate reader (BioTek Instruments, Inc., Winooski, VT, USA). Qualified DNA from four females and four males of M. favus was used for library construction. Library preparation was performed by Guangzhou Ruike Gene Co., Ltd. (Guangzhou, China), following standard Illumina protocols to generate paired-end libraries with ~350 bp inserts. Library quality was evaluated by qPCR and the Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) [42,43]. Libraries passing quality control were sequenced on an Illumina NovaSeq 6000 (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) platform with 150 bp paired-end reads.

2.5. Genome Assembly and Evaluation Methods

After quality control, high-quality sequencing reads were assembled de novo using SOAPdenovo2 (v2.04) with a multi-Kmer strategy (K = 33, 43, 53, 63, 73, 83, 93), constructing scaffolds based on read overlaps and paired-end relationships to obtain optimal assemblies. GapCloser (v1.12) was then used for two rounds of gap filling and correction, generating the reference genome for subsequent analyses [44].
Genome assembly quality and characteristics were assessed by K-mer analysis. Clean reads were counted using Jellyfish (v2.3.0, https://github.com/gmarcais/Jellyfish, accessed on 6 May 2025) with K = 21, and genome size was estimated with GenomeScope2 (v2.0, https://github.com/tbenavi1/genomescope2.0, accessed on 6 May 2025) assuming diploidy (ploidy = 2, K = 21) [45,46].

2.6. Sequence Alignment and Identification of Sex-Specific Sequences

Resequencing reads from the remaining three male individuals were aligned to the male reference genome using bwa (v0.7.17-r1188) with the mem algorithm and default parameters [47]. Reads that failed to align as proper pairs were discarded. Sequences covered by all three male datasets were defined as male-shared sequences. Similarly, reads from three female individuals were aligned to the female reference genome, and sequences present in all three female datasets were defined as candidate female-specific sequences.
Aligned reads were sorted using SAMtools (v1.14) with the sort function. To improve alignment accuracy, properly paired reads were filtered using view –bF 12 for downstream analyses [48]. Sex-specific sequences were identified by comparing coverage between sexes, retaining sequences fully covered in all individuals of one sex but absent in all individuals of the opposite sex (Figure 1).

2.7. Primer Design and PCR Amplification Validation

Sex-specific sequences identified from high-throughput sequencing were used to design PCR primers with Primer3 (v4.1.0, https://bioinfo.ut.ee/primer3-0.4.0/, accessed on 16 June 2025) [49]. Design appropriate PCR protocols based on the melting temperature of primers. Then PCR products were visualized on 1.2% agarose gels.
The reliability of the markers was first validated in the remaining 8 female and 8 male parental individuals and was subsequently further evaluated in 24 (12 females and 12 males) self-fertilized offspring. Cross-species validation was performed on 16 individuals (8 females and 8 males) of M. armatus to assess marker transferability.

3. Results

3.1. Phenotypic Sex Identification

Phenotypic sex was determined by gonadal dissection in all individuals. For offspring whose sex could not be reliably identified based on external morphology due to incomplete gonadal development (Figure 2a,b), histological examination was performed. Gonadal sections stained with hematoxylin and eosin revealed individuals with abundant oocytes as females (Figure 2c) and those containing spermatocytes as males (Figure 2d). Using combined anatomical and histological analyses, phenotypic sex was accurately confirmed for all individuals used in genome sequencing and marker validation.

3.2. Sequencing Data Statistics

Raw sequencing reads were filtered using fastp (v0.23.2) with the parameters -q 20 -l 150, while all other settings were kept as default. In total, approximately 119.72 GB of high-quality clean data were obtained from eight M. favus individuals, including 60.73 GB from four females and 57.99 GB from four males. For all samples, the Q20 values exceeded 98% and the Q30 values exceeded 93%, demonstrating high sequencing accuracy and data reliability. These results indicate that the sequencing data were of sufficient quality for downstream genome assembly and sex-specific sequence identification. Detailed statistics are provided in Table 1.

3.3. Genome Sequencing, Assembly, and Evaluation

Independent genome assemblies were generated for the female (F_WWCQF3) and male (M_WWCQM3) individuals using their respective sequencing datasets. Genome characterization indicated comparable genome sizes between sexes, with low heterozygosity and repeat content (Table 2), suggesting limited genomic complexity. The K-mer distributions exhibited a clear unimodal pattern (Figure 3), confirming that M. favus is a diploid species. Based on the SOAPdenovo2 assemblies (Table 3), the assembled genome sizes were 613.49 Mb for the female and 610.53 Mb for the male, with scaffold N50 values of 34.06 kb and 34.44 kb, respectively. The GC content was approximately 40.56%, and a substantial number of scaffolds exceeded 10 kb in length, indicating that these draft genomes were adequate for downstream sex-specific sequence identification and marker development.

3.4. Identification of Sex-Specific Sequences Supports an XY Sex Determination System in M. favus

Each resequenced individual was aligned to both the female and male reference genomes, with pair-matched read ratios exceeding 85% for all samples (Table 4). A total of 72 sex-specific sequences were subsequently identified, of which the vast majority were male-specific (69 sequences), with a cumulative length of 44,512 bp, ranging from 304 to 2838 bp and averaging 645 bp. In contrast, only three female-specific sequences were detected, with lengths of 1464 bp, 1127 bp, and 370 bp. As illustrated in Figure 4, both the number and total length of male-specific sequences were markedly greater than those of female-specific sequences, suggesting that M. favus likely follows an XY sex determination system. Detailed information on all sex-specific sequences is provided in Supplementary File S1.

3.5. Primers W5 and W14 Accurately Discriminate Sex in Both Parental and Offspring Populations

Based on the 69 male-specific sequences, a total of 54 pairs of male-specific primers were designed. Detailed information on all primer sequences is provided in Supplementary File S2. PCR amplification revealed that primer W5 consistently produced a single male-specific band of 361 bp in all male individuals, whereas no amplification products were detected in any female individuals (Figure 5a,b). Primer W14 consistently amplified two fragments (437 bp and 257 bp) in all males, while only a single 257 bp fragment was observed in all females (Figure 5c,d). Genetic sex assignments based on both markers were fully concordant with phenotypic sex in parental and offspring populations, and the amplification patterns remained stable in the self-crossed progeny, demonstrating the high reliability of W5 and W14 for sex identification.

3.6. Conservation and Cross-Species Applicability of Male-Specific Sequences and Sex-Specific Markers

To investigate the conservation and chromosomal distribution of male-specific sequences in a closely related species, the 69 male-specific sequences identified in M. favus were aligned against the M. armatus reference genome (NCBI: GCA_019455535.1) using BLAST + 2.17.0. Of these, 66 sequences were successfully mapped, with sequence identity ranging from 74.66% to 100% (Figure 6). Chromosomal distribution revealed that 45 sequences were located on the Y chromosome, six on the X chromosome, four on chromosome 15, two on chromosome 18, eight on other autosomes, and one on an unplaced scaffold. These results indicate that male-specific sequences in M. favus are highly conserved in M. armatus and are predominantly enriched on sex chromosomes.
In addition, to evaluate the cross-species applicability of sex-related molecular markers between M. favus and M. armatus, the M. favus sex-specific markers W5 and W14, as well as the M. armatus sex marker M2 [11], were reciprocally tested in the other species. As shown in Figure 7a–c, neither W5 nor W14 exhibited sex-discriminatory capacity in M. armatus, as similar amplification patterns were observed in both males and females, with no clear sex-associated differentiation. Likewise, the amplification pattern of M2 in M. favus was inconsistent: although all males produced amplicons ranging from 500 to 750 bp, the fragment sizes differed markedly from those observed in M. armatus, whereas females yielded only fragments smaller than 500 bp or showed no amplification [11].These results indicate that the currently developed sex-specific markers W5, W14, and M2 are species-specific and effective only within their respective taxa, and therefore lack cross-species universality.

4. Discussion

The identification of sex-specific molecular markers is fundamental for elucidating sex determination systems, particularly in teleosts where sex chromosomes are weakly differentiated and lack conspicuous heteromorphy [7,12]. Traditional marker systems such as AFLP are characterized by low throughput, non-targeted discovery, and limited integration with genomic resources, and have repeatedly failed to identify sex-linked markers in multiple fish species [50,51,52]. Although RAD-seq has expanded marker discovery in some taxa [53], its dependence on restriction sites and short sequence tags restricts genome coverage and hampers precise localization of SDRs [27,54,55,56].
In contrast, The WGS re-seq strategy employed in this study offers higher coverage and more comprehensive variant information [13,30]. With the support of reference genomes, comparative analyses of resequencing data from four females and four males enabled the efficient identified of 72 sex-specific sequences. This approach, based on multiple high-depth samples, effectively excludes false positives arising from individual genetic variation or sequencing artifacts, thereby yielding stable and broadly applicable markers [26,57]. Importantly, this strategy does not rely solely on a single-sex reference genome; instead, cross-validation using both male and female assemblies further enhances the reliability of identified sex-specific sequences [58].
Based on these genome-wide comparisons, the strong predominance of male-specific sequences, coupled with the stable male-specific amplification of markers W5 and W14 across both parental and offspring populations, supports at the molecular level that M. favus follows a male heterogametic (XX/XY) sex determination system [13,26,59]. Combined with the pronounced male-biased growth observed in this species, the PCR-based markers developed here will enable accurate genetic sex identification at early developmental stages, overcoming the absence of external sexual dimorphism and providing a practical foundation for marker-assisted breeding and the future production of all-male stocks [39].
Comparative analyses among closely related species have shown that transferable sex-specific markers can serve as molecular anchors for investigating the radiation and evolution of sex determination systems in fishes, as demonstrated in spotted mandarin fish (Siniperca scherzeri) and big-eye mandarin fish (S. kneri) [58], as well as in Sebastes carnatus and S. chrysomelas [60]. Our study reveals a notable contrast: While male-specific sequences of M. favus are highly conserved in the M. armatus genome and show significant enrichment on its sex chromosomes, particularly the Y chromosome. This conservation pattern may indicate a shared, homologous Y-linked region. However, the sex-specific markers developed here (W5 and W14) are not transferable between the two species. Conversely, the previously reported sex marker for M. armatus is also not applicable to M. favus. Similar patterns have been observed in blunt snout bream (Megalobrama amblycephala) and its congeners M. terminalis and M. hoffmanni [61]. Given that both M. favus and M. armatus are likely at an early stage of sex chromosome differentiation and lack heteromorphic sex chromosomes [38,62], this apparent paradox of sequence conservation coupled with marker non-transferability could be explained by a highly restricted SDR that may comprise only small, non-recombining genomic fragments.
Similarly to findings reported in C. maculata and M. salmoides [25,63], the sex-specific markers developed in this study also show no homology to well-characterized master SD genes such as Dmrt1 or Amhr2 [8,64]. This may be attributed to the current genome assembly, which is based on second-generation sequencing data, and the moderate sample size used for marker validation, imposing certain limitations on resolution and continuity. Future efforts should prioritize the construction of a chromosome-level or telomere-to-telomere (T2T) reference genome for M. favus to enable precise delineation of the SDR. Additionally, expanding validation across geographically diverse populations will further confirm the general applicability of these markers and aid in screening candidate SD genes. These steps will help clarify the origin and evolution of the sex determination system within the genus Mastacembelus.

5. Conclusions

In this study, a draft genome of M. favus was generated using second-generation sequencing, and comparative resequencing of four females and four males identified 44.5 kb of male-specific sequences, supporting an XX/XY sex-determination system. Two robust PCR-based male-specific markers (W5 and W14) were further developed and validated in both parental and offspring populations, demonstrating high specificity and reliability for genetic sex identification. Homology analyses with M. armatus revealed that a large proportion of male-specific sequences are evolutionarily conserved, providing additional insights into sex chromosome differentiation within Mastacembelus. Collectively, these results provide practical molecular tools for early sex identification and monosex breeding in M. favus, establishing a basis for further research. Future studies will focus on building a T2T genome for precise SDR mapping and validating these markers across diverse populations, thereby elucidating the evolutionary dynamics of sex chromosomes within Mastacembelus.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ani16040605/s1. Supplementary File S1: All sex-specific sequences; Supplementary File S2: All primer sequences.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: L.Z. and H.S. (Hu Shu); methodology: L.Z. and C.H.; validation: W.Z., H.L., H.S. (Hao Sheng), and W.C.; formal analysis: L.Z.; investigation: L.Z., H.S. (Hao Sheng), and M.C.; resources: M.C.; data curation: L.Z. and Y.C.; writing—original draft preparation: L.Z.; writing—review and editing: H.S. (Hu Shu) and C.H.; visualization: L.Z. and Y.C.; supervision: H.S. (Hu Shu) and C.H.; project administration and funding acquisition: H.S. (Hu Shu). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by grants from the Seed Industry Revitalization Project funded by the Provincial Rural Revitalization Strategy in 2024 (2024-SPY-00–016), Science and Technology Program of Guangdong Province (2019B030316022), and China-ASEAN Maritime Cooperation Fund (CAMC-2018F) and the “2 + 5” platform funding support from Guangzhou University. The funders had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit this article for publication.

Institutional Review Board Statement

All animal procedures were strictly conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines. This study complied with the animal care guidelines of the Experimental Animal Ethics Committee of Guangzhou University, China, and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Guangzhou University (Approval Date: 16 November 2025; IRB Approval No. 168/2025).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The funders had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit this article for publication. Additionally, Guangdong Lianyi Aquatic Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd. (affiliated with author Mingxiang Cui) solely provided the aquaculture site and Mastacembelus favus breeding techniques for this research. The company had no role in the study design, data interpretation, manuscript preparation, or publication decision. The research conclusions are completely independent and not directly related to the company’s commercial interests.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with a minor correction to the readability of Figure 5 and Figure 7. This change does not affect the scientific content of the article.

References

  1. Chen, J.; Hu, W.; Zhu, Z. Progress in studies of fish reproductive development regulation. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2013, 58, 7–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kikuchi, K.; Hamaguchi, S. Novel sex-determining genes in fish and sex chromosome evolution. Dev. Dyn. 2013, 242, 339–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Li, X.-Y.; Gui, J.-F. Diverse and variable sex determination mechanisms in vertebrates. Sci. China Life Sci. 2018, 61, 1503–1514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Miya, M.; Gotoh, R.O.; Sado, T. MiFish metabarcoding: A high-throughput approach for simultaneous detection of multiple fish species from environmental DNA and other samples. Fish. Sci. 2020, 86, 939–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Devlin, R.H.; Nagahama, Y. Sex determination and sex differentiation in fish: An overview of genetic, physiological, and environmental influences. Aquaculture 2002, 208, 191–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Han, C.; Liu, S.; Peng, S.; Liu, S.; Zeng, J.; Chen, J.; Lin, H.; Li, C.; Li, S.; Zhang, Y. Assembly and analysis of Sinipercidae fish sex chromosomes reveals that a supergene drives sex chromosome origin and turnover. Adv. Biotechnol. 2025, 3, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Kitano, J.; Ansai, S.; Takehana, Y.; Yamamoto, Y. Diversity and Convergence of Sex-Determination Mechanisms in Teleost Fish. Annu. Rev. Anim. Biosci. 2024, 12, 233–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Tenugu, S.; Senthilkumaran, B. Sexual plasticity in bony fishes: Analyzing morphological to molecular changes of sex reversal. Aquac. Fish. 2022, 7, 525–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sun, L.-N.; Jiang, X.-L.; Xie, Q.-P.; Yuan, J.; Huang, B.-F.; Tao, W.-J.; Zhou, L.-Y.; Nagahama, Y.; Wang, D.-S. Transdifferentiation of Differentiated Ovary into Functional Testis by Long-Term Treatment of Aromatase Inhibitor in Nile Tilapia. Endocrinology 2014, 155, 1476–1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Dan, C.; Lin, Q.; Gong, G.; Yang, T.; Xiong, S.; Xiong, Y.; Huang, P.; Gui, J.F.; Mei, J. A novel PDZ domain-containing gene is essential for male sex differentiation and maintenance in yellow catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco). Sci. Bull. 2018, 63, 1420–1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Qin, W.; Han, C.; Yang, J.; Yu, Z.; Feng, Y.; Wu, Y.; Lu, B.; Cui, M.; Shu, H. Development of genetic sex markers of zig-zag eel (Mastacembelus armatus) by a NGS method. Aquaculture 2023, 571, 739498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Yang, C.; Chen, L.; Huang, R.; Gui, B.; Li, Y.; Li, Y.; Li, Y.; Liao, L.; Zhu, Z.; Wang, Y. Screening of Genes Related to Sex Determination and Differentiation in Mandarin Fish (Siniperca chuatsi). Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 7692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Du, J.; Zhou, J.; Li, S.; Shao, J.; Jiang, P.; Dong, C.; Bai, J. A PCR-based method for genetic sex identification and evidence of the XX/XY sex determination system in largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides L.). Aquaculture 2021, 545, 737220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Nie, Z.; Lü, P.; Zhang, R.; Tu, Y.; Liu, Z.; Li, Y.; Tang, C.; Li, X.; Zhao, K.; Zhou, Q.; et al. A simple and rapid method for fish sex identification based on recombinase-aided amplification and its use in Cynoglossus semilaevis. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 10429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Botstein, D.; White, R.L.; Skolnick, M.; Davis, R.W. Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 1980, 32, 314–331. [Google Scholar]
  16. Chen, J.; Wang, Y.; Yue, Y.; Xia, X.; Du, Q.; Chang, Z. A novel male-specific DNA sequence in the common carp, Cyprinus carpio. Mol. Cell. Probes 2009, 23, 235–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Vale, L.; Dieguez, R.; Sanchez, L.; Martinez, P.; Vinas, A. A sex-associated sequence identified by RAPD screening in gynogenetic individuals of turbot (Scophthalmus maximus). Mol. Biol. Rep. 2014, 41, 1501–1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Ezaz, M.T.; Harvey, S.C.; Boonphakdee, C.; Teale, A.J.; McAndrew, B.J.; Penman, D.J. Isolation and physical mapping of sex-linked AFLP markers in nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus L.). Mar. Biotechnol. 2004, 6, 435–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Chen, S.-L.; Li, J.; Deng, S.-P.; Tian, Y.-S.; Wang, Q.-Y.; Zhuang, Z.-M.; Sha, Z.-X.; Xu, J.-Y. Isolation of Female-Specific AFLP Markers and Molecular Identification of Genetic Sex in Half-Smooth Tongue Sole (Cynoglossus semilaevis). Mar. Biotechnol. 2007, 9, 273–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Hua, J.; Qiang, J.; Tao, Y.; Li, Y.; Lu, S.; Bing, X. Development and validation of a PCR-RFLP / TaqMan MGB probe method for rapid sex identification of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). Aquac. Rep. 2023, 30, 101593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Xiao, Y.; Xiao, Z.; Liu, L.; Ma, Y.; Zhao, H.; Wu, Y.; Huang, J.; Xu, P.; Liu, J.; Li, J. Innovative approach for high-throughput exploiting sex-specific markers in Japanese parrotfish Oplegnathus fasciatus. Gigascience 2024, 13, giae045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wang, D.; Mao, H.L.; Chen, H.X.; Liu, H.Q.; Gui, J.F. Isolation of Y- and X-linked SCAR markers in yellow catfish and application in the production of all-male populations. Anim. Genet. 2009, 40, 978–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Chen, J.; Shao, X.; Ye, S.; Xiao, J.; Zou, Y.; Ye, K.; Zhang, L.; Wang, Z.; Xiao, S.; Cai, M. Development of sex-specific markers in Spinyhead croaker, Collichthys lucidus. Aquaculture 2022, 547, 737424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Xiao, J.; Zou, Y.; Xiao, S.; Chen, J.; Wang, Z.; Wang, Y.; Jie, X.; Cai, M. Development of a PCR-based genetic sex identification method in spinyhead croaker (Collichthys lucidus). Aquaculture 2020, 522, 735130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Han, C.; Zhou, X.; Lu, H.; Zhu, Q.; Han, L.; Li, S.; Lin, H.; Zhang, Y. A simple PCR-based genetic sex identification method in the blotched snakehead (Channa maculata) developed by high-throughput sequencing. Aquaculture 2021, 538, 736579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Yang, C.; Huang, R.; Ou, M.; Gui, B.; Zhao, J.; He, L.; Li, Y.; Liao, L.; Chen, K.; Wang, Y. A rapid method of sex-specific marker discovery based on NGS and determination of the XX / XY sex-determination system in Channa maculata. Aquaculture 2020, 528, 735499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ou, M.; Yang, C.; Luo, Q.; Huang, R.; Zhang, A.D.; Liao, L.J.; Li, Y.M.; He, L.B.; Zhu, Z.Y.; Chen, K.C.; et al. An NGS-based approach for the identification of sex-specific markers in snakehead (Channa argus). Oncotarget 2017, 8, 98733–98744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Zhang, A.; Huang, R.; Chen, L.; Xiong, L.; He, L.; Li, Y.; Liao, L.; Zhu, Z.; Wang, Y. Computational identification of Y-linked markers and genes in the grass carp genome by using a pool-and-sequence method. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 8213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lin, A.; Xiao, S.; Xu, S.; Ye, K.; Lin, X.; Sun, S.; Wang, Z. Identification of a male-specific DNA marker in the large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea). Aquaculture 2017, 480, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Han, C.; Zhu, Q.; Lu, H.; Wang, C.; Zhou, X.; Peng, C.; Tang, L.; Han, L.; Chen, J.; Li, S.; et al. Screening and characterization of sex-specific markers developed by a simple NGS method in mandarin fish (Siniperca chuatsi). Aquaculture 2020, 527, 735495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ma, Y.; Xiao, Y.; Xiao, Z.; Wu, Y.; Zhao, H.; Li, J. Identification of Male-Specific Molecular Marker and Development of PCR-Based Genetic Sex Identification Technique in Spotted Knifejaw (Oplegnathus punctatus). Mar. Biotechnol. 2022, 24, 969–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Roberts, T.R. Systematic Review of the Mastacembelidae or Spiny Eels of Burma Thailand, with Description of Two New Species of Macrognathus. Jpn. J. Ichthyol. 1986, 33, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Jamaluddin, J.A.F.; So, N.; Tam, B.M.; Ahmad, A.; Grudpan, C.; Md Sah, A.S.R.; Mohd Nor, S.A. Genetic diversity of the tire track eel Mastacembelus favus in Southeast Asia inferred from microsatellite markers. Ichthyol. Res. 2021, 68, 529–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jamaluddin, J.A.F.; So, N.; Tam, B.M.; Ahmad, A.; Grudpan, C.; Page, L.M.; Khaironizam, M.Z.; Mohd Nor, S.A. Genetic variation, demographic history and phylogeography of tire track eel, Mastacembelus favus (Synbranchiformes: Mastacembelidae) in Southeast Asia. Hydrobiologia 2019, 838, 163–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Loan, P.P.; Thanh Phuong, N. Effects of Dietary Protein and Lipid Levels on Growth, Feed Utilization, and Body Composition of Tire Track Eel (Mastacembelus favus) Fingerlings. Isr. J. Aquac.-Bamidgeh 2025, 77, 48–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Duong, T.-Y.; Tran, L.V.D.; Nguyen, N.-T.T.; Jamaluddin, J.A.F.; Azizah, M.N.S. Unravelling taxonomic ambiguity of the Mastacembelidae in the Mekong Delta (Vietnam) through DNA barcoding and morphological approaches. Trop. Zool. 2020, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Jamsari, A.F.J.; Nam, S.; Tam, B.M.; Siti-Azizah, M.N. Isolation and characterisation of microsatellite loci in the tire track eel, Mastacembelus favus and cross-species amplification. Conserv. Genet. Resour. 2013, 6, 477–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Seree, W.; Supiwong, W.; Nuntaporn, G.; Ditcharoen, S.; Donbundit, N.; Seetapan, K.; Tongnunui, S.; Juntharat, S.; Tanomtong, A. Comparative study on karyotypes of three Mastacembelus species (Synbranchiformes: Mastacembelidae) from Thailand. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 2025, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lu, B.; Zhang, L.; Yu, Z.; Yang, J.; Xue, X.; Feng, Y.; Chen, Y.; Han, C.; Liu, R.; Yin, X.; et al. Cultivate YY supermale fish for the production of genetically all male zig-zag eel (Mastacembelus armatus) by MAS-GM technique. Aquac. Rep. 2024, 39, 102376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lu, B.; Xue, X.; Yu, Z.; Zhang, L.; Yang, J.; Feng, Y.; Chen, Y.; Han, C.; Yin, X.; Shu, H. Completely blocking the feminization by replacing Limnodilus spp. with Artemia salina to feeding XY Zig-zag eel (Mastacembelus armatus). Aquaculture 2024, 589, 741009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Sun, Y.-L.; Jiang, D.-N.; Zeng, S.; Hu, C.-J.; Ye, K.; Yang, C.; Yang, S.-J.; Li, M.-H.; Wang, D.-S. Screening and characterization of sex-linked DNA markers and marker-assisted selection in the Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Aquaculture 2014, 433, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Hussing, C.; Kampmann, M.-L.; Mogensen, H.S.; Børsting, C.; Morling, N. Quantification of massively parallel sequencing libraries—A comparative study of eight methods. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Senst, A.; Bonsiepe, H.; Kron, S.; Schulz, I. Application of the Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer instrument as quality control for next-generation sequencing. J. Forensic Sci. 2024, 69, 2192–2196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Luo, R.; Liu, B.; Xie, Y.; Li, Z.; Huang, W.; Yuan, J.; He, G.; Chen, Y.; Pan, Q.; Liu, Y.; et al. SOAPdenovo2: An empirically improved memory-efficient short-read de novo assembler. Gigascience 2012, 1, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Marçais, G.; Kingsford, C. A fast, lock-free approach for efficient parallel counting of occurrences of k-mers. Bioinformatics 2011, 27, 764–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Ranallo-Benavidez, T.R.; Jaron, K.S.; Schatz, M.C. GenomeScope 2.0 and Smudgeplot for reference-free profiling of polyploid genomes. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Li, H.; Durbin, R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 2009, 25, 1754–1760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Li, H.; Handsaker, B.; Wysoker, A.; Fennell, T.; Ruan, J.; Homer, N.; Marth, G.; Abecasis, G.; Durbin, R. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 2009, 25, 2078–2079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Untergasser, A.; Cutcutache, I.; Koressaar, T.; Ye, J.; Faircloth, B.C.; Remm, M.; Rozen, S.G. Primer3—New capabilities and interfaces. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40, e115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Gao, Z.X.; Wang, H.P.; Yao, H.; Tiu, L.; Wang, W.M. No sex-specific markers detected in bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus by AFLP. J. Fish Biol. 2010, 76, 408–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Yarmohammadi, M.; Pourkazemi, M.; Ghasemi, A.; Saber, M.; Chakmehdouz, F. AFLP reveals no sex-specific markers in Persian sturgeon (Acipenser persicus) or beluga sturgeon (Huso huso) from the southern Caspian Sea, Iran. Prog. Biol. Sci. 2013, 1, 55–60. [Google Scholar]
  52. Sriphairoj, K.; Na-Nakorn, U.; Brunelli, J.P.; Thorgaard, G.H. No AFLP sex-specific markers detected in Pangasianodon gigas and P. hypophthalmus. Aquaculture 2007, 273, 739–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Dai, S.; Zhou, Y.; Guo, X.; Liu, M.; Wang, T.; Li, Z.; Han, D.; Mei, J.; Wang, Z.; Gui, J. Sex-specific markers developed by genome-wide 2b-RAD sequencing confirm an XX/XY sex determination system in Chinese longsnout catfish (Leiocassis longirostris). Aquaculture 2022, 549, 737730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Gamble, T.; Zarkower, D. Identification of sex-specific molecular markers using restriction site-associated DNA sequencing. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2014, 14, 902–913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Zhang, S.-Q.; Xiong, X.-M.; Shi, R.-H.; Luo, L.-F.; Wang, G.-Y.; Tang, D.-W.; Li, Q.; Gao, Z.-X. Screening and characterization of sex-specific markers for the hybrid (Megalobrama amblycephala ♀ × Ancherythroculter nigrocauda ♂) based on 2b-RAD and transcriptome sequencing. Aquaculture 2022, 548, 737704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Gamble, T. Using RAD-seq to recognize sex-specific markers and sex chromosome systems. Mol. Ecol. 2016, 25, 2114–2116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Xing, T.F.; Li, Y.L.; Liu, J.X. Female-specific genomic regions and molecular sex identification of the clearhead icefish (Protosalanx hyalocranius). BMC Genom. 2021, 22, 495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Han, C.; Zhu, Q.; Zhou, X.; Ouyang, H.; Han, L.; Chen, J.; Li, S.; Li, G.; Lin, H.; Zhang, Y. A PCR-based genetic sex identification method in spotted mandarin fish (Siniperca scherzeri) and big eye mandarin fish (Siniperca kneri). Aquac. Rep. 2020, 18, 100552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Liu, H.; Pang, M.; Yu, X.; Zhou, Y.; Tong, J.; Fu, B. Sex-specific markers developed by next-generation sequencing confirmed an XX/XY sex determination system in bighead carp (Hypophthalmichehys nobilis) and silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix). DNA Res. 2018, 25, 257–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Fowler, B.L.; Buonaccorsi, V.P. Genomic characterization of sex-identification markers in Sebastes carnatus and Sebastes chrysomelas rockfishes. Mol. Ecol. 2016, 25, 2165–2175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Fu, Y.; Luo, L.; Wang, S.; Yu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Gao, Z. Identification of sex-specific markers using genome re-sequencing in the blunt snout bream (Megalobrama amblycephala). BMC Genom. 2024, 25, 963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Xue, L.; Gao, Y.; Wu, M.; Tian, T.; Fan, H.; Huang, Y.; Huang, Z.; Li, D.; Xu, L. Telomere-to-telomere assembly of a fish Y chromosome reveals the origin of a young sex chromosome pair. Genome Biol. 2021, 22, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. He, Q.; Ye, K.; Han, W.; Yekefenhazi, D.; Sun, S.; Xu, X.; Li, W. Mapping sex-determination region and screening DNA markers for genetic sex identification in largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). Aquaculture 2022, 559, 738450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Jin, L.; Jia, S.; Zhang, W.; Chen, Y.; Li, S.; Liu, P.; Li, J.; Lv, J. Identification of sex-specific DNA markers: Providing molecular evidence for the ZW sex determination system in the redclaw crayfish (Cherax quadricarinatus). Aquaculture 2022, 546, 737254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Animals 16 00605 g001
Figure 1. Technical Roadmap. (i) identifying candidate sex-specific sequences through alignment of resequencing data to reference genomes; (ii) confirming their conservation via PCR validation; and (iii) inferring the sex determination system based on marker distribution patterns. Blue indicates alignment with the male genome, while red indicates alignment with the female genome.
Figure 1. Technical Roadmap. (i) identifying candidate sex-specific sequences through alignment of resequencing data to reference genomes; (ii) confirming their conservation via PCR validation; and (iii) inferring the sex determination system based on marker distribution patterns. Blue indicates alignment with the male genome, while red indicates alignment with the female genome.
Animals 16 00605 g001
Animals 16 00605 g002
Figure 2. Phenotypic sex identification of M. favus. (a,b) Gross morphology of gonads in female and male individuals; (c,d) Histological sections of gonads stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) for phenotypic sex identification; (c) Ovary; (d) testis; ov, ovarian cavity; oc, oocyte; sc, spermatocyte.
Figure 2. Phenotypic sex identification of M. favus. (a,b) Gross morphology of gonads in female and male individuals; (c,d) Histological sections of gonads stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) for phenotypic sex identification; (c) Ovary; (d) testis; ov, ovarian cavity; oc, oocyte; sc, spermatocyte.
Animals 16 00605 g002
Animals 16 00605 g003
Figure 3. K-mer frequency distribution of the M. favus genome. The blue curve represents the male individual (M_WWCQM3), and the red curve represents the female individual (F_WWCQF3), Both distributions exhibit a unimodal pattern.
Figure 3. K-mer frequency distribution of the M. favus genome. The blue curve represents the male individual (M_WWCQM3), and the red curve represents the female individual (F_WWCQF3), Both distributions exhibit a unimodal pattern.
Animals 16 00605 g003
Animals 16 00605 g004
Figure 4. Distribution of sex-specific sequences in M. favus. The blue curve represents male-specific sequences, and the red curve represents female-specific sequences.
Figure 4. Distribution of sex-specific sequences in M. favus. The blue curve represents male-specific sequences, and the red curve represents female-specific sequences.
Animals 16 00605 g004
Animals 16 00605 g005
Figure 5. PCR amplification patterns of the sex-specific markers W5 and W14 in different populations of M. favus populations. (a,b) Sex identification using W5/W14 in the parental population; (c,d) Sex identification using W5/W14 in the self-offspring population. Male-specific bands were consistently amplified in both populations. Marker sizes are 100, 250, 500, 750, 1000, and 2000 bp.
Figure 5. PCR amplification patterns of the sex-specific markers W5 and W14 in different populations of M. favus populations. (a,b) Sex identification using W5/W14 in the parental population; (c,d) Sex identification using W5/W14 in the self-offspring population. Male-specific bands were consistently amplified in both populations. Marker sizes are 100, 250, 500, 750, 1000, and 2000 bp.
Animals 16 00605 g005
Animals 16 00605 g006
Figure 6. Chromosomal distribution of male-specific sequences from M. favus in the M. armatus genome. Colors represent the density of mapped sequences, indicating regions of enrichment on chromosomes.
Figure 6. Chromosomal distribution of male-specific sequences from M. favus in the M. armatus genome. Colors represent the density of mapped sequences, indicating regions of enrichment on chromosomes.
Animals 16 00605 g006
Animals 16 00605 g007
Figure 7. Cross-species PCR validation of sex-specific markers. (a) M. favus marker W5 in M. armatus; (b) M. favus marker W14 in M. armatus; (c) M. armatus marker M2 in M. favus. PCR results show that none of the three markers exhibits cross-species applicability, as their amplification patterns fail to distinguish sex in the reciprocal species. Marker sizes are 100, 250, 500, 750, 1000, and 2000 bp.
Figure 7. Cross-species PCR validation of sex-specific markers. (a) M. favus marker W5 in M. armatus; (b) M. favus marker W14 in M. armatus; (c) M. armatus marker M2 in M. favus. PCR results show that none of the three markers exhibits cross-species applicability, as their amplification patterns fail to distinguish sex in the reciprocal species. Marker sizes are 100, 250, 500, 750, 1000, and 2000 bp.
Animals 16 00605 g007
Table 1. Sequencing Data Statistics Table.
Table 1. Sequencing Data Statistics Table.
SexSampleReads (#)Base (nt)GC (%)Q20 (%)Q30 (%)
FemaleFWWCQF1100,293,91815,044,087,70040.5798.8195.68
FemaleFWWCQF294,809,76014,221,464,00040.7298.2393.68
FemaleFWWCQF3118,987,65017,848,147,50040.5798.5694.69
FemaleFWWCQF490,798,07213,619,710,80040.6098.4894.62
MaleMWWCQM181,932,36812,289,855,20040.1998.9495.96
MaleMWWCQM286,915,12213,037,268,30040.2498.7395.34
MaleMWWCQM3127,367,27019,105,090,50040.6299.1096.15
MaleMWWCQM497,027,58614,554,137,90040.6398.8296.38
Note: GC (%), guanine-cytosine content; Q20 (%), percentage of bases with a Phred quality score ≥ 20; Q30 (%), percentage of bases with a Phred quality score ≥ 30.
Table 2. GenomeScope2 Genome Evaluation Table.
Table 2. GenomeScope2 Genome Evaluation Table.
Female (F_WWCQF3)Male (M_WWCQM3)
propertyminmaxminmax
Homozygous (aa)99.75%99.78%99.75%99.78%
Heterozygous (ab)0.22%0.25%0.22%0.25%
Genome_Haploid_Length (bp)588,855,855589,747,654588,620,893589,384,787
Genome_Repeat_Length (bp)98,489,60798,638,76598,176,62598,304,035
Genome_Unique_Length (bp)490,366,248491,108,889490,444,268491,080,752
Model_Fit85.10%99.46%85.08%99.42%
Read_Error_Rate0.17%0.17%0.12%0.12%
Table 3. Assembly Results Evaluation Table.
Table 3. Assembly Results Evaluation Table.
FemaleMale
Total_Size613,486,153610,533,399
Total_Num693,778646,741
Average_Length884944
Max_Length (nt)493,522529,229
Min_Length (nt)100100
seqs ≥ 2 kb_Num25,58425,826
seqs ≥ 10 kb_Num12,05412,136
seqs ≥ 100 kb_Num765728
seqs ≥ 1 Mb_Num00
Nucleotide_A (nt)183,041,550182,065,752
Nucleotide_T (nt)180,860,643179,972,903
Nucleotide_C (nt)124,573,103124,052,767
Nucleotide_G (nt)123,674,964123,191,622
Nucleotide_N (nt)1,335,8931,250,355
N5034,06434,435
L5042594297
GC_Content (%)40.5540.58
Note: N50, length of the shortest contig/scaffold at 50% of the total assembly length when ordered from longest to shortest; L50, minimum number of contigs/scaffolds whose combined length reaches 50% of the total.
Table 4. Sequence Alignment Statistics Table.
Table 4. Sequence Alignment Statistics Table.
SampleTotal ReadsReference (Female)Reference (Male)
Match ReadsMatch Read RatioPair Match
Reads		Pair Match Reads RatioMatch ReadsMatch
Reads Ratio		Pair Match
Reads		Pair Match Reads Ratio
F_WWCQF1100,293,918100,248,30799.9586,315,66886.06100,253,06599.9686,011,39285.76
F_WWCQF294,809,76094,746,98899.9381,330,18685.7894,748,41499.9481,001,63685.44
F_WWCQF3118,987,650118,969,13699.98102,959,03086.53118,951,08299.97102,454,58686.11
F_WWCQF490,798,07290,753,63199.9578,794,64686.7890,766,16399.9678,535,32886.49
M_WWCQM181,932,36881,266,55899.1971, 185,41086.8881,281,05299.2170,918,93886.56
M_WWCQM286,915,12286,846,72399.9276,247,17487.7386,858,32799.9376,023,54887.47
M_WWCQM3127,367,270127,269,66699.92110,659,73086.88127,319,46799.96110,416,46286.69
M_WWCQM497,027,58696,917,89599.8984,454,12687.0496,931,46499.984,133,89686.71
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, L.; Chen, Y.; Zhu, W.; Sheng, H.; Chen, W.; Li, H.; Cui, M.; Han, C.; Shu, H. Sex-Specific Marker Development and Identification of an XY Sex Determination System in the Tire Track Eel (Mastacembelus favus) via Whole-Genome Resequencing. Animals 2026, 16, 605. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani16040605

AMA Style

Zhang L, Chen Y, Zhu W, Sheng H, Chen W, Li H, Cui M, Han C, Shu H. Sex-Specific Marker Development and Identification of an XY Sex Determination System in the Tire Track Eel (Mastacembelus favus) via Whole-Genome Resequencing. Animals. 2026; 16(4):605. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani16040605

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Linan, Yiman Chen, Wenshi Zhu, Hao Sheng, Weikai Chen, Haojie Li, Mingxiang Cui, Chong Han, and Hu Shu. 2026. "Sex-Specific Marker Development and Identification of an XY Sex Determination System in the Tire Track Eel (Mastacembelus favus) via Whole-Genome Resequencing" Animals 16, no. 4: 605. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani16040605

APA Style

Zhang, L., Chen, Y., Zhu, W., Sheng, H., Chen, W., Li, H., Cui, M., Han, C., & Shu, H. (2026). Sex-Specific Marker Development and Identification of an XY Sex Determination System in the Tire Track Eel (Mastacembelus favus) via Whole-Genome Resequencing. Animals, 16(4), 605. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani16040605

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop