Front. Cell Dev. Biol. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2296-634X Frontiers Media S.A. 880779 10.3389/fcell.2022.880779 Cell and Developmental Biology Original Research Epigenetic Regulation of Phenotypic Sexual Plasticity Inducing Skewed Sex Ratio in Zebrafish Hosseini et al. Epigenetic Mechanism Underlying Sexual Plasticity Hosseini Shahrbanou 1 2 3 4 * Trakooljul Nares 5 * Hirschfeld Marc 1 3 Wimmers Klaus 5 Simianer Henner 4 6 Tetens Jens 2 4 Sharifi Ahmad Reza 4 6 Brenig Bertram 1 3 4 1 Molecular Biology of Livestock and Molecular Diagnostics Group, Department of Animal Sciences, University of Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany 2 Functional Breeding Group, Department of Animal Sciences, University of Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany 3 Institute of Veterinary Medicine, University of Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany 4 Center for Integrated Breeding Research (CiBreed), University of Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany 5 Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), Institute of Genome Biology, Genomics Unit, Dummerstorf, Germany 6 Animal Breeding and Genetics Group, Department of Animal Sciences, University of Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany

Edited by: Miguel Constancia, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom

Reviewed by: Dafni Anastasiadi, The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Ltd., New Zealand

Hongjuan Shi, Guangdong Ocean University, China

*Correspondence: Shahrbanou Hosseini, shahrbanou.hosseini@uni-goettingen.de; Nares Trakooljul, trakooljul@fbn-dummerstorf.de

These authors have contributed equally to this work

This article was submitted to Developmental Epigenetics, a section of the journal Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology

15 07 2022 2022 10 880779 21 02 2022 21 06 2022 Copyright © 2022 Hosseini, Trakooljul, Hirschfeld, Wimmers, Simianer, Tetens, Sharifi and Brenig. 2022 Hosseini, Trakooljul, Hirschfeld, Wimmers, Simianer, Tetens, Sharifi and Brenig

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

The plasticity of sexual phenotype in response to environmental conditions results in biased sex ratios, and their variation has an effect on population dynamics. Epigenetic modifications can modulate sex ratio variation in species, where sex is determined by genetic and environmental factors. However, the role of epigenetic mechanisms underlying skewed sex ratios is far from being clear and is still an object of debate in evolutionary developmental biology. In this study, we used zebrafish as a model animal to investigate the effect of DNA methylation on sex ratio variation in sex-biased families in response to environmental temperature. Two sex-biased families with a significant difference in sex ratio were selected for genome-wide DNA methylation analysis using reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS). The results showed significant genome-wide methylation differences between male-biased and female-biased families, with a greater number of methylated CpG sites in testes than ovaries. Likewise, pronounced differences between testes and ovaries were identified within both families, where the male-biased family exhibited a higher number of methylated sites than the female-biased family. The effect of temperature showed more methylated positions in the high incubation temperature than the control temperature. We found differential methylation of many reproduction-related genes (e.g., sox9a, nr5a2, lhx8a, gata4) and genes involved in epigenetic mechanisms (e.g., dnmt3bb.1, dimt1l, hdac11, h1m) in both families. We conclude that epigenetic modifications can influence the sex ratio variation in zebrafish families and may generate skewed sex ratios, which could have a negative consequence for population fitness in species with genotype-environment interaction sex-determining system under rapid environmental changes.

DNA methylation RRBS phenotypic sexual plasticity zebrafish sex-biased family sex ratio variation H. Wilhelm Schaumann Stiftung10.13039/501100019415

香京julia种子在线播放

    1. <form id=HxFbUHhlv><nobr id=HxFbUHhlv></nobr></form>
      <address id=HxFbUHhlv><nobr id=HxFbUHhlv><nobr id=HxFbUHhlv></nobr></nobr></address>

      Introduction

      In evolutionary developmental biology, the mechanism of sex determination is one of the most important developmental processes in bipotential gonad to differentiate into a testis or an ovary and establish the sex of an organism in a binary fate decision. Gonochoristic vertebrates exhibit two major types of sex determination, namely genotypic sex determination (GSD) and environmental sex determination (ESD). In organisms with GSD, sex is determined at the time of fertilization by inheritance of genetic factors, whereas in organisms with ESD, sex is determined after fertilization in response to environmental conditions (Penman and Piferrer, 2008; Mank and Avise, 2009; Piferrer et al., 2012). However, in some GSD species, the primary sex can be influenced by environmental factors during sensitive periods of development, during which some individuals can alter their phenotype to the opposite sex without changing their genotype (Ospina-Alvarez and Piferrer, 2008; Shao et al., 2014; Shen and Wang, 2014). In this system, sex is determined by genotype-environment interaction (G × E). In species with this kind of sex-determining system, the genetic mechanism of regular developmental trajectory of gonad is redirected by environmental factors, resulting in a change in sexual phenotype known as environmental sex reversal (Stelkens and Wedekind, 2010; Shao et al., 2014; Holleley et al., 2016). This phenomenon is relatively common in many animal species such as reptiles (Quinn et al., 2007; Holleley et al., 2016), amphibians (Wallace et al., 1999), insects (Vance, 1996; Narita et al., 2007), and fish (Devlin and Nagahama, 2002; Senior et al., 2015), and can rapidly affect the evolution of species (Shao et al., 2014; Holleley et al., 2016). The sex-reversed individuals can affect the number of males and females in a population and may give rise to offspring at skewed sex ratio (Senior et al., 2015). Sex ratio is a key demographic parameter influencing the structure of populations and their reproductive capacity (Penman and Piferrer, 2008). Skewed sex ratios are reflected by sex-biased families (male-biased or female-biased) in a population, resulting in one sex being more abundant than the other sex. Hence, the main concern about skewed sex ratio in species with a G × E sex-determining system is that they may have negative consequences on population dynamics as a result of non-adaptive sex ratio under rapid climate change (Ospina-Alvarez and Piferrer, 2008; Shao et al., 2014). Understanding the mechanism underlying G × E is therefore an important research interest related to the conservation of natural populations and livestock species in order to develop counterstrategies for dealing with unforeseeable ecological consequences.

      Zebrafish (Danio rerio), a small tropical fish, is an excellent research model animal to study the mechanism of sex determination and the effect of environmental changes on gonadal differentiation in vertebrates (Liew and Orban, 2014; Ribas and Piferrer, 2014). In the process of sex determination in zebrafish, all individuals initially develop an undifferentiated ovary-like gonadal structure called juvenile ovary, regardless of their actual and final phenotypic sex (Uchida et al., 2002; Wang et al., 2007). The bipotent gonad undergo apoptosis during critical embryonic developmental stages or during larval development and shift from ovarian to testicular differentiation in future males. In contrast, ovarian differentiation continues and oocytes grow to maturity in future females (Uchida et al., 2002; Wang et al., 2007; Liu et al., 2015). Cytogenetic studies and breeding experiments on zebrafish indicated that there are no heteromorphic sex chromosomes in zebrafish, suggesting sex is determined by a polygenic sex determination system (PSD), in which the sex-determining genes are distributed across the genome and sex is determined by combining their alleles (Amores and Postlethwait, 1999; Liew et al., 2012; Liew and Orban, 2014). However, a recent restriction site-associated DNA (RAD) mapping study revealed that there is a difference in the genetic makeup of wild zebrafish populations and domesticated strains: the presence of a chromosomal sex determination system in wild populations (ZZ/ZW) and the loss of the region harboring detectable sex-linked loci in domesticated strains during the domestication process (Wilson et al., 2014). Furthermore, the RAD-tag population genomics study in zebrafish also demonstrated that some female genotypes exhibited male phenotypes in natural populations, suggesting that environmental or genetic factors may cause female-to-male sex reversal (masculinization) (Wilson et al., 2014). A further investigation of environmentally induced sex reversal in a domesticated zebrafish strain exposed to high ambient temperature showed that a subset of heat-exposed animals became masculinized and, interestingly, a subset of females with a normal ovarian phenotype exhibited a male-like gonad in response to elevated temperature (Ribas et al., 2017a). In our recent studies of G × E effect on phenotypic plasticity in zebrafish, we found sex ratio variation among different zebrafish families and heat-induced masculinization in response to high temperature (Hosseini et al., 2019a; 2019b), supporting the PSD system and environmentally induced sex reversal in domesticated zebrafish strains in agreement with previous studies (Abozaid et al., 2011, 2012; Liew et al., 2012; Ribas et al., 2017a). A multi-generation selection experiment on sex ratio variation in a large number of zebrafish families revealed very similar offspring sex ratio between repeated crosses from the same breeding pair in sex-biased families, suggesting sex in zebrafish is a heritable trait (Liew et al., 2012). A later investigation of the effect of elevated temperature on zebrafish sex also demonstrated the similarity of progeny sex ratio between repeated crosses of the same breeding pair and showed that the occurrence of changes in sex ratio caused by increased temperature is family specific (Ribas et al., 2017a). Wide variation of sex ratio among different zebrafish families (family-biased sex ratio) and sex reversal in response to environmental conditions during the critical developmental time window in several studies led to the conclusion that sex determination in zebrafish is a PSD system and sex is determined by G × E. However, the genetic mechanisms underlying family-dependent sex ratio in zebrafish and the effect of environmental temperature on their genetic makeup have not yet been fully elucidated.

      Sexual development and plasticity of phenotypic sex induced by environmental factors can be influenced by a dynamic epigenetic landscape of chromatin modification during sexual differentiation (Piferrer, 2013). Epigenetic mechanisms can integrate genomic and environmental factors to generate a particular phenotype in response to the internal or external stimulus through changes in the transcriptional activity of genes (Cavalieri and Spinelli, 2017; Piferrer et al., 2019). Methylation of DNA is one of the most important heritable epigenetic modifications in vertebrates, in which a methyl group is added to the 5′ position of cytosine next to a guanine (CpG) by a group of enzymes called DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs) (Bird, 1986; Wu et al., 2011; Piferrer, 2013). Previous studies have reported the importance of epigenetic mechanisms on sexual development, particularly in species with G × E such as in European sea bass (Navarro-Martin et al., 2011), half-smooth tongue sole (Shao et al., 2014), and Nile tilapia (Sun et al., 2016). However, a comprehensive assessment of the function of epigenetic regulation on vertebrate sexual development and its impact on sexual plasticity is far from being clear even in the widely used research model animal, the zebrafish (Shao et al., 2014; Ribas et al., 2017b). In light of global climate change, the effect of epigenetic modifications such as DNA methylation on sexual plasticity in thermosensitive species using the zebrafish as a research model animal is therefore well worth investigating. The mechanisms of epigenetic regulation of sex determination in family-biased sex ratio in zebrafish has not yet been studied. Therefore, in this study, we performed genome-wide DNA methylation in zebrafish gonad to address the effect of epigenetic modifications on sex ratio variation of sex-biased families (male-biased and female-biased) and phenotypic sexual plasticity in response to environmental temperature.

      Materials and Methods Animal Husbandry of Parental Generation

      The DDR zebrafish strain (Von Hertell et al., 1990; Hosseini et al., 2019a), a laboratory strain, was used in this study. This strain was provided by the Company Aquafarm Ryba Zeven, GmBH (Zeven, Germany) in 1990 (Von Hertell et al., 1990) and were kept in the recirculation systems of aquaculture facilities at the University of Goettingen according to the institutional guidelines on the use of animals for research purpose. The broodstocks were kept at 28 ± 0.5°C and maintained under a 12-h light/12-h dark photoperiod with dissolved oxygen around 7 mg/L and pH value of water 7.4 ± 0.2. The fish were fed twice daily with commercial dry food (Tetramine Junior, Germany) for zebrafish and freshly hatched Artemia salina nauplii. Temperature, pH, and dissolved oxygen were monitored daily, whereas other water quality parameters such as ammonia and nitrite were checked periodically to ensure that they were within the appropriate range.

      Experimental Design for Producing Families and Their Rearing Conditions

      In this experiment, the fertilized eggs of 17 full-sib zebrafish families derived from parental generation were submitted in equal proportion to two different temperature incubations: 1) control group was kept at a constant temperature of 28°C, the standard rearing temperature for zebrafish (Detrich et al., 2004; Ribas and Piferrer 2014), throughout the experiment, 2) high incubation temperature group (treatment group) was exposed to the high water temperature of 35°C during embryogenesis from 5 to 24 hours post fertilization (hpf), which is a crucial time window for gonadal development during embryogenesis in zebrafish (Kimmel et al., 1995; Abozaid et al., 2011; Hosseini et al., 2019a). The temperature of the treatment group applied in this study was in accordance with previously reported studies (Abozaid et al., 2011; Hosseini et al., 2019a, 2019b; Valdivieso et al., 2020). The treatment group was returned to the control temperature of 28°C after treatment. The water temperature of the treatment group was changed gradually to avoid heat stress. The larvae of each family were maintained separately in 3-L tanks (Aqua Schwarz GmbH, Germany) under a photoperiod of 12-h light and 12-h darkness and fed three times a day with commercial food for zebrafish (Tetramine baby, Germany) and Artemia salina nauplii. Feeding started at 5 days post fertilization (dpf), after the yolk sac was absorbed. At this stage, the larvae of each family were transferred in 7-L tanks. High rearing density during gonadal differentiation in zebrafish (around 15–45 dpf, Ribas et al., 2017c) can influence the sex ratio variation. The appropriate density during this developmental period without significant effects on masculinization was determined to be less than 20 fish per litre (Ribas et al., 2017c). Therefore, we applied the appropriate density within the tanks in this study, as recommended by Ribas et al. (2017c). In the case of a high number of animals within a family, we increased the number of tanks to avoid density-induced masculinization (Supplementary Table 1, S1). The temperature of all experimental groups was measured daily to ensure the accuracy of the experiment. All other husbandry facilities, fish management and water quality control, and animal care for the families produced in this study were identical to our previous study (Hosseini et al., 2019a). After treatment, all experimental groups were then kept under the same conditions until sexual maturity in the adult stage (90–120 dpf). The phenotypic sex of all individuals from both experimental groups was determined at about three and a half months of age to be sure that the phenotypic sex of all animals is distinguishable. In the case of unclear phenotypic sex, microscopic examination of the gonad was used to recognize the sex of individuals. An overview of the experimental design and sample collection in this study is illustrated in Figure 1.

      General overview of experimental design and gonadal tissue sample collection for RRBS analysis in this study. hpf, hours post fertilization; dpf, days post fertilization.

      Statistical Analysis of Sex Ratio in Different Produced Families

      Statistical analysis of the sex ratio was performed using the linear logistic model with a binary response variable by applying the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS System 9.3 (Littell et al., 2006). To characterize the male-biased and female-biased families of zebrafish, the significant differences in sex ratio among the different families in the control group were analyzed using the following model 1: log ( π i 1 π i ) =   μ + α i where π i is the probability of being male, μ is the general mean effect, α i is the fixed effect of family.

      To select the families for reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) analysis in this study, two decision criteria were applied: 1) a high difference in the proportion of males between the families under control condition (model 1), and 2) a high difference in the proportion of males between control and treatment groups within the families. The statistical analysis for differences in the proportion of males with regard to the classification of sex-biased families was carried out for the two selected families (male-biased and female-biased) considering the fixed effect of family, treatment, and family-treatment interaction using the following model 2: log ( π i j 1 π i j ) =   μ + α i + β j + α i × β j where π i j is the probability of being male, μ is the general mean effect, α i is the fixed effect of family, β j is the fixed effect of temperature treatment (j = 1: treatment group at 35°C, j = 2: control group at 28°C), and, α i × β j is the fixed effect of interaction between the main factors. Least squares means were estimated on the logit scale and then back transformed using the inverse link function to the original scale. The significant differences between least squares means were tested using a t-test procedure by inclusion of the PDIFF option in the Lsmeans statement.

      Tissue Sample Collection for DNA Extraction

      We collected the gonadal tissue samples of 6 females and 12 males in each experimental group: control male, control female, treatment male, and treatment female, in two different zebrafish families (male-biased and female-biased) separately. All animals were at the same age (three and a half months), when the samples were taken. Due to the small size of the male gonad tissue, we collected more male gonad samples to pool the DNA samples of two males in each group in the next step of the laboratory analysis. To this end, a total number of 72 gonad tissue samples from male and female animals were collected for RRBS analysis in this study (Figure 1). For this purpose, the gonadal tissue samples were carefully dissected postmortem from animals and flash frozen in liquid nitrogen after dissection and stored at −80°C for further laboratory analysis.

      DNA Isolation and Preparation of RRBS Libraries

      Genomic DNA was extracted from gonad samples using the AllPrep DNA/RNA Mini Kit (Qiagen) with proteinase K and RNase A treatment according to the manufacturer’s recommendation. About 20 mg of the ovary tissue from each individual was used for DNA extraction, while the pooled testes of two animals were used to recover enough DNA. The integrity of intact DNA was assessed on 1.2% agarose gel electrophoresis and the quantity was determined using a NanoDrop spectrophotometer. Two micrograms of DNA sample were spiked-in with 1% DNA control [unmethylated cl857 Sam7 Lambda DNA (Promega)] and digested overnight with 100U MspI (New England Biolabs). The DNA fragments were recovered, end-repaired, A-tailed and ligated to TruSeq DNA adapters (cytosines methylated) using the TruSeq Nano DNA library prep kit (Illumina) according to the manufacturer’s protocols. The adapter-ligated DNA libraries were subjected to bisulfite conversion using the EZ DNA Methylation-Gold Kit according to the manufacturer’s protocols (Zymo Research). The libraries were amplified after bisulfite conversion using the PfuTurbo Cx Hotstart DNA Polymerase kit (Stratagene). The quality of the libraries was assessed on 2100 Bioanalyzer using a high-sensitive DNA chip (Agilent Technologies). The normalized RRBS libraries were multiplexed and parallel sequenced for 121 bp single reads on the HiSeq 2500 system (Illumina) at the sequencing facility of Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), Dummerstorf, Germany according to the manufacturer’s recommendations using the HiSeq SR Cluster and HiSeq SBS Kit v4 (Illumina).

      Bioinformatics Analysis

      The bcl2fastq2 conversion software v2.19 was used to convert base call (BCL) files into fastq files. The overall quality of sequencing reads was inspected pre- and post-processing using FastQC (Babraham Bioinformatics, United Kingdom). The raw fastq files were pre-processed to remove adapter-like sequence and trim 2 bp artificial filled-in of the blunt-end of both 5′and 3′ using TrimGalore (v.0.6.5). Cleaned reads were mapped to the Danio rerio reference genome (GRCz11) downloaded from Ensembl (http://ftp.ensembl.org/pub/release-100/fasta/danio_rerio/dna/) and performed methylation calls using Bismark version 0.22.3 (https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/bismark/). Visualization of mapped data was performed using SeqMonk (https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/seqmonk/).

      Differentially Methylation Analysis

      In this study, a total of 1,322,526 CpG sites (raw) were mapped at least in one sample. The raw CpGs were filtered to keep only CpG sites that were covered at least 10 reads and present in all samples. Finally, only 210,009 CpG sites passed the filters and used in downstream analyses. The RRBS analysis was performed in the R-Statistics program (R Core Team, 2015) using the “edgeR” package (Robinson et al., 2010; Chen et al., 2017). To assess the effect of DNA methylation in sex-biased zebrafish families, two different analytical strategies were applied in this study: 1) comparing the methylation profiles of male-biased versus female-biased family within each gonad type in control and treatment conditions (see result in Figure 4, comparisons between families) and 2) comparing the methylation profiles of testes versus ovaries within each family type in control and treatment conditions (see result in Figure 6, comparisons within families). This resulted in eight comparisons, for which we performed genome-wide DNA methylation analysis. Differential methylation analysis was conducted in edgeR, considering the counts for methylated and unmethylated reads as separate observations in order to use both reads in statistical model using generalized linear approach underlying a negative binomial distribution and the likelihood ratio test to identify the differentially methylated CpG sites (DMCs) in different experimental groups in form of log2 fold change. To fit the total read count at each genomic CpG site, the generalized linear approach modeled the proportion of methylated reads as an over-dispersed binomial distribution. This method allows direct modeling of the inherent variability of the data and thus possibly more realistic analysis of the data. The CpG sites with low coverage (less than 8) were removed from the downstream analysis based on the quality control proposed by edgeR to avoid unreliable results of methylation levels across all samples (Chen et al., 2017). The standard false discovery rate (FDR) approach of Benjamini–Hochberg (Benjamini and Hochberg, 1995) was applied to account for the multiple testing correction to control a statistical significance. The methylation differences between the compared groups were considered to be statistically significant at FDR < 0.05. In this study, we analyzed differential methylation changes of individual CpG sites (DMCs) on a genome-wide scale, which is a single-base resolution and more informative than region analysis approach (differentially methylated regions, DMRs). We have particularly analyzed DMRs focusing on 2 kb upstream and 1 kb downstream of the transcription start site (TSS), which includes the promoter and 5′ upstream regions. A total of 2,977 out of 6,790 promoter regions accommodating 79,340 CpGs passed the filters and were used in downstream analysis. A mean of 12 CpGs and a median of seven CpGs were detected by our RRBS data in the 3 kb promoter regions. For DMRs analysis, we focused on promoter regions due to clear evidence of general relationships with gene expression and regulation. To investigate the sex-determining genes associated with DMCs, we generated a list of candidate genes, most of which have been reported in our previous transcriptomic study (RNA-Seq) in the zebrafish gonad (Hosseini et al., 2019b), in which the experimental design and procedure were identical to this study. However, integration of DNA methylation and expression levels of these candidate genes was not performed in this study due to the use of gonad samples of different animals. We have then expanded this list here to include the genes involved in epigenetic mechanisms. This list was compiled from literature, ZFIN database, and the NCBI gene database for zebrafish. To this end, a total number of 174 genes were used as selected candidate genes in this study (Supplementary Table 2, S2). This list was employed to further investigate the association between the DMCs and the candidate genes in different experimental groups.

      Functional Annotation Analysis

      Functional enrichment analysis was performed to gain insight into the biological interpretations of genes associated with differential methylation in comparisons between the two sex-biased families of zebrafish. We used the genes for which the DMCs (Figures 4, 6) were mapped to the genes at the genomic distance from the methylated CpG sites to the TSS (within a window of 10 kb upstream and downstream to the TSS) for pathway and gene ontology (GO) analysis. Likewise, both enrichment analyses were performed for genes that were differentially methylated in the promoter regions (Supplementary Figure 9). For this purpose, two different approaches were applied. In the first analysis, the differentially methylated genes in male-biased versus female-biased family in the control and treatment groups were used for the gene set enrichment analysis, as illustrated in Figure 4, to find the differences between the male-biased and the female-biased families regardless of the effect of sex. In the second analysis, the differentially methylated genes in testes versus ovaries of male-biased and female-biased families were used, as presented in Figure 6. In the latter approach of gene sets enrichment analysis, in order to find the differences between the male-biased and the female-biased families in interaction with sex, we separately merged the results of annotated pathways and GOs of male-biased and female-biased families in the control and in the treatment group, to identify the unique and nonredundant pathways and GOs for each family. For GO enrichment analysis, topGO package was used to test the enrichment of GO terms by applying Fisher’s Exact test (Alexa and Rahnenfuhrer, 2020). To analyze the overrepresentation of pathways in Reactome database, the Wilcoxon test was computed for each gene set. To this end, the GOs and pathways with the p-values less than 0.05 were investigated to be enriched in gene set enrichment analysis. All functional enrichment analyses were performed in R-Statistics program (R Core Team, 2015).

      Results Sex Ratio Variation in Different Zebrafish Families in Response to Temperature

      In this study, the effect of high incubation temperature (35°C) during embryonic development from 5 to 24 hpf compared to the control temperature (28°C, normal rearing temperature for zebrafish) on sex ratio variation of different zebrafish families (N = 17 families) was examined. In the rest of the paper, the terms “treatment” and “control” are used instead of high incubation temperature and control temperature for simplicity. The results showed a wide range of sex ratio variation between families (Figure 2A), suggesting a PSD in the domestic zebrafish strain used in this study. Based on the sex ratio determined, the families were divided into three categories as described by Liew et al. (2012): 1) female-biased family (less than 40% males in the control group), 2) unbiased family (40%–60% males in the control group), and 3) male-biased family (more than 60% males in the control group). From seventeen different initial families, we selected one female-biased (family 5) and one male-biased (family 16) family to investigate the epigenetic mechanisms of sex determination underlying these two sex-biased families and their response to temperature (see Materials and Methods). Considering only the families in the control group (model 1, see Materials and Methods) to determine the sex-biased families, and applying a logistic model, there was a significant effect of the factor of family (p < 0.0001; F-statistic) and a significant difference in the proportion of males between the two selected families (p < 0.0015). Considering only the families in the treatment group (model 1), there was also a significant effect of the factor family (p < 0.0001; F-statistic) and a significant difference in the proportion of males in the treatment group between the two selected families (p < 0.006). In the statistical analysis considering only the two selected families (model 2, see Materials and Methods), there was a significant difference in the proportion of males independent of temperature effect (49.83 vs. 75.90, p < 0.0001). Using the same model for control condition, there was also a significant difference in the proportion of males in the two selected families (40.74 vs. 70.31), which is important in terms of it being a sex-biased family (p = 0.0017) (Figure 2B). Considering only the selected families (model 2), a significant difference was found in the proportion of males between the control and treatment groups (p = 0.0184) across families. However, the significance level between control and treatment groups was not very pronounced within the two selected families (p = 0.0590 and p = 0.1454). Since all animals used in this study were kept under the same husbandry conditions and recirculating system with an appropriate stocking density (see Materials and Methods), the effect of tank on the level of methylation and consequently on the sex ratio variation within families were not presented.

      Sex ratio of different zebrafish families. (A) Differences in the sex ratio of different families (Lsmeans) in the control group and the total number of sex-determined individuals in the control and treatment of each family. (B) Sex ratio of control and treatment groups in the two selected families: family 5 (female-biased family) and family 16 (male-biased family) for RRBS analysis. a–b significant difference between the proportion of male in the control and treatment groups of the two selected families.

      Genome-Wide DNA Methylation Landscape and Stratification of Different Experimental Groups

      To explore the effect of epigenetic mechanisms on sexual phenotype of sex-biased zebrafish families, we performed multidimensional scaling analysis (MDS) of RRBS datasets to visualize overall differences in DNA methylation (M-value) between individual samples of different experimental groups (Figure 3). The M-value in MDS is calculated from the differences between methylated and unmethylated CpG sites of all individual samples on the log-scale (Chen et al., 2017). The results showed distinct clusters of DNA methylation profiles separating between testes and ovaries in dimension 1 and male-biased and female-biased families in dimension 2 (Figure 3). No clear separation was observed between the control and treatment groups, indicating that there was no pronounced effect of temperature treatment in the overall DNA methylation of CpG sites between individual samples. In addition, we observed no distinct differences between control and treated males in MDS plot. In the study by Ribas et al. (2017a), animals from a female-biased family became 90% male in the treatment group, which was partly due to the effect of high ambient temperature. In the group exposed to the temperature, three or four animals out of ten selected animals for gene expression analysis were expected to be normal males and six or seven animals were expected to be neomales (Ribas et al., 2017a). However, in the same study, a subset of males (2 out of 10, 20%) in the treated group was identified as sex-reversed animals using cluster analysis of the transcriptome profiles. This value corresponds to the 30% of the expected number of neomales in the treatment group. Therefore, 60%–70% of the animals that could be defined as expected neomals had a gonadal expression profile identical to that of the normal males in the control group. In our study, the percentage of males in the treated group was lower than the study of Ribas et al. (2017a) in the two sex-biased families investigated. Hence, the expected number of sex-reversed males in the treated group of our study would be approximately two in the female-biased family and one in the male-biased family out of twelve animals used for RRBS analysis in each family. Therefore, the results of our MDS analysis are consistent with the results of expected masculinization in the treatment group (6 or 7 sex-reversed males out of 10) of the study of Ribas et al. (2017a), which were not detected in the cluster analysis.

      Multidimensional scaling analysis (MDS) of overall DNA methylation profiles in zebrafish gonad. The first dimension (x-axis) separates females from males in both sex-biased families. The second dimension (y-axis) separates female-biased family from male-biased family. FCFB (female control female-biased), FTFB (female treatment female-biased), MCFB (male control female-biased), MTFB (male treatment female-biased), FCMB (female control male-biased), FTMB (female treatment male-biased), MCMB (male control male-biased), MTMB (male treatment male-biased).

      We further considered the methylation pattern in the context of annotated genes and CpG islands (Supplementary Figures 1–3). The variations in the DNA methylation landscape of the zebrafish is similar to that of other species (Cavalieri and Spinelli, 2017; Mayne et al., 2020). The methylation level is relatively low around the TSS and increases along up- and down-stream distances away from TSS, as illustrated in Supplementary Figure 1. The pattern is similar between sex-biased families and temperature groups, but differs slightly between testes and ovaries (Supplementary Figures 1A,B). The conservation of the DNA methylation landscape is also found over the gene features and CpG islands. The methylation level increases in the gene body relative to the TSS and decreases at the 3′UTR (Supplementary Figure 2). The methylation level within the CpG island is relatively low compared to 10 kb surrounding regions (Supplementary Figure 3).

      Differentially Methylated CpG Sites in Male-Biased and Female-Biased Families

      To assess the differences in DNA methylation of sex-biased zebrafish families, given the clear clustering pattern in Figure 3, we compared the methylation profiles of male-biased versus female-biased family within each gonad type in control and treatment conditions in different experimental groups: female control male-biased versus female control female-biased (FCMB vs. FCFB), male control male-biased versus male control female-biased (MCMB vs. MCFB), female treatment male-biased versus female treatment female-biased (FTMB vs. FTFB), male treatment male-biased versus male treatment female-biased (MTMB vs. MTFB) (Figure 4; Supplementary Figure 4; and Supplementary Table 3, S3–6).

      Differentially methylated CpG sites (DMCs) in zebrafish gonad of male-biased versus female-biased family. Bar charts illustrate DMCs in ovaries in control (A) and treatment (B) groups of male-biased vs. female-biased family (FCMB vs. FCFB and FTMB vs. FTFB, respectively), and in testes in control (C) and treatment (D) groups of male-biased vs. female-biased family (MCMB vs. MCFB and MTMB vs. MTFB, respectively).

      The overall results of differentially methylated CpG sites (DMCs) showed that the male-biased family exhibited a higher number of hypermethylated CpGs than the female-biased family in both ovaries and testes in control and treatment groups (FDR < 0.05, Figure 4). Our close observation of differences between the two sex-biased families in each gonad type revealed that a total of 805 CpGs in the control group and 1,188 CpGs in the treatment group were differentially methylated in the ovaries. The same comparison between the two sex-biased families showed that a total of 1,969 CpGs in the control group and 2,182 CpGs in the treatment group were differentially methylated in the testes. Of these DMCs, the number of hypermethylated CpGs in the testes were greater than the ovaries in both control (966 vs. 409) and treatment (1,221 vs. 699) groups. Considering the effect of temperature on DMCs compared between the two sex-biased families revealed more hypermethylated CpGs in the treatment group than the control group in both ovaries (699 vs. 409) and testes (1,221 vs. 966).

      Chromosome-Wise Distribution of Methylated CpG Sites and Their Associated Genes

      The chromosome-wise distribution of DMCs in male-biased versus female-biased family of zebrafish is shown in Manhattan plots (Figure 5). The genes associated with the genomic location of significant DMCs (family-biased genes) with at least four methylated positions are mapped across the chromosomes of the compared experimental groups. This value approximately corresponds to the fifth percentile of the distribution of the top significant methylated positions for all four comparisons. The plots revealed that a few genes (N = 7) were common to all compared groups, whereas the majority of genes (N = 47) associated with the top significant methylated CpG sites differed among these groups. Pairwise comparison between testes and ovaries in male-biased versus female-biased family revealed that the genes associated with the top significant DMCs was greater in the testes than ovaries in both control and treatment groups, as also shown in Figure 4. Consideration of the differentially methylated genes in the control group revealed 29 non-common genes, when comparing FCMB vs. FCFB with MCMB vs. MCFB in the control group (Figures 5A,B). However, in the treatment group, 36 genes differed between FTMB vs. FTFB and MTMB vs. MTFB (Figures 5C,D). Comparison of the distribution of differentially methylated loci mapped to genes in the ovaries of the control and treatment groups (Figures 5A,C) indicated the differences on chromosomes 7, 12, 17, and 22, whereas these differences in the testes were found on chromosomes 3, 18, and 19 (Figures 5B,D). The names of the correspondence genes in each compared group are shown in Figures 5A–D.

      Chromosomal distribution of differentially methylated CpG sites (DMCs) in zebrafish gonad. (A) female control male-biased versus female control female-biased (FCMB vs. FCFB); (B) male control male-biased versus male control female-biased (MCMB vs. MCFB); (C) female treatment male-biased versus female treatment female-biased (FTMB vs. FTFB); (D) male treatment male-biased versus male treatment female-biased (MTMB vs. MTFB). Each dot represents a CpG site with genomic position on the x-axis and –log10 (p-value) for differentially methylation between different experimental groups on the y-axis. Red dots represent the genomic distribution of DMCs associated with significantly differential genes comprising at least four methylated positions (fifth percentile of distribution). The corresponding gene names are displayed on top of the chromosomes. Red line represents the significance at Bonferroni threshold < 0.05.

      We further investigated the overlap between genes associated with DMCs and reproduction-related genes and genes involved in epigenetic mechanisms, which are referred to as candidate genes in this study (Materials and Methods). The results showed a subset of them were significantly differentially methylated in different experimental groups in male-biased versus female-biased family of zebrafish (Supplementary Table 4, S7). Among them, two methyltransferase genes (trmt10c and shmt2) and one chromatin-related gene (hmgn3) were significantly differentially methylated in four compared groups. Furthermore, some of the important reproduction-related genes (e.g., gdf9, star, nr5a2, piwil1, fmr1, sox3, lef1) were identified in testes and ovaries of male-biased compared to female-biased family in both control and treatment groups. Of these, fmr1, which was also observed on the chromosome 14 in the MCMB vs. MCFB and MTMB vs. MTFB in Manhattan plots (Figures 5B,D), showed more DMCs in the testes than ovaries.

      Differentially Methylated CpG Sites in Testes Versus Ovaries Within Sex-Biased Families

      To understand the epigenetic mechanisms underlying plasticity of sexual development in zebrafish, we compared testes versus ovaries within the two sex-biased families in control and treatment conditions in different experimental groups: male control male-biased versus female control male-biased (MCMB vs. FCMB), male control female-biased versus female control female-biased (MCFB vs. FCFB), male treatment male-biased versus female treatment male-biased (MTMB vs. FTMB), male treatment female-biased versus female treatment female-biased (MTFB vs. FTFB) (Figure 6; Supplementary Figure 5; and Supplementary Tables 5–8, S8–11).

      Differentially methylated CpG sites (DMCs) in testes versus ovaries within male-biased and female-biased zebrafish families. Bar charts illustrate DMCs in testes vs. ovaries in control group of male-biased (A) and female-biased (B) families (MCMB vs. FCMB and MCFB vs. FCFB, respectively), and in testes vs. ovaries in treatment group of male-biased (C) and female-biased (D) families (MTMB vs. FTMB and MTFB vs. FTFB, respectively).

      The overall results showed a remarkable difference of DMCs in testes versus ovaries within both sex-biased families, where the DNA methylation landscape of the testes exhibited strikingly higher number of hypermethylated CpGs than the ovaries in both male-biased and female-biased families in control and treatment groups (FDR < 0.05, Figure 6). Further close observations within each family revealed that a total of 109,877 CpGs in the control group and 108,973 CpGs in the treatment group were differentially methylated in the male-biased family. Similarly, a total of 104,193 CpGs in the control group and 107,750 CpGs in the treatment group were differentially methylated in the female-biased family. Among these methylated sites, the number of hypermethylated CpGs in testes versus ovaries of male-biased family was greater than the female-biased family in the control (100,028 vs. 94,836) and treatment (101,111 vs. 98,285) groups. Considering the effect of temperature on DMCs within both sex-biased families demonstrated more hypermethylated CpGs in the treatment group than the control group of both male-biased (101,111 vs. 100,028) and female-biased (98,285 vs. 94,836) families.

      Genes Associated With DNA Methylation Changes in Male-Biased and Female-Biased Families

      To find the effect of DNA methylation changes on genes in male-biased and female-biased families, we annotated the DMCs with nearest genes comparing testes versus ovaries, resulting in the detection of unique genes (family-specific genes) in each family and common genes in overlap between the two sex-biased families (Figures 7A,B). The results of Venn diagram showed 488 unique genes in the male-biased family and 389 unique genes in the female-biased family in the control group (Figure 7A). The same comparison in the treatment group revealed 477 and 426 unique genes in the male-biased and female-biased family, respectively (Figure 7B). The unique genes of each sex-biased family with a range of at least four DMCs are shown in the Forest plots (Figures 7C–F). This value corresponds approximately to the fifth percentile of the distribution of the number of the significant methylated positions for all compared groups. The plots showed the range of variation (minimum and maximum values) and the mean values in the level of methylation (log2 FC) for different positions associated with unique genes in each sex-biased family. The result indicated that the number of significant methylated unique genes was higher in male-biased (23 genes) than female-biased (6 genes) family in the control group. The same trend was observed in the treatment group, 28 genes in the male-biased and 14 genes in the female-biased family.

      Genes associated with the significantly differentially methylated CpG sites comparing testes versus ovaries within sex-biased families. Venn diagrams illustrate the differences between the male-biased and the female-biased families in the control (A) and treatment (B) groups. Forest plots represent the unique genes in each sex-biased family, as classified in the Venn diagram, associated with the differentially methylated sites, indicating a range of at least four methylated positions (fifth percentile of distribution) in different experimental groups: (C) male control male-biased versus female control male-biased (MCMB vs. FCMB); (D) male control female-biased versus female control female-biased (MCFB vs. FCFB); (E) male treatment male-biased versus female treatment male-biased (MTMB vs. FTMB); (F) male treatment female-biased versus female treatment female-biased (MTFB vs. FTFB). The x-axis represents the differences mean fold change (log2 FC) per gene.

      Investigation of the overlap between candidate genes and the methylated unique genes in each sex-biased family (Figures 7A,B) revealed the differential methylation of a few genes in all compared groups (data not shown). The number of DMCs associated with these candidate genes was low, so that the validation of their association is not robust enough.

      Further investigation of the overlap between candidate genes and common genes in the two sex-biased families, 8,954 genes in the control group (Figure 7A) and 8,988 genes in the treatment group (Figure 7B), demonstrated that most of them were significantly differentially methylated in both sex-biased families (Figures 8A,B).

      Candidate genes associated with significantly differentially methylated CpG sites in overlap between male-biased and female-biased families. (A) male control male-biased versus female control male-biased (MCMB vs. FCMB) in overlap with male control female-biased versus female control female-biased (MCFB vs. FCFB); (B) male treatment male-biased versus female treatment male-biased (MTMB vs. FTMB) in overlap with male treatment female-biased versus female treatment female-biased (MTFB vs. FTFB). This figure illustrates a range of at least 10 methylated positions per gene, where the number of differentially methylated sites (NDMS) for each gene is shown with the corresponding group colour. Genes involved in epigenetic mechanisms are marked with an asterisk (*). Other genes are reproduction-related genes. The x-axis represents the differences in mean fold change (log2 FC) per gene.

      The level of significantly differentially methylated candidate genes (log2 FC) illustrated the range of minimum to maximum value variation and the mean values in the compared groups corresponding to at least ten DMCs for each gene. Our findings showed that many of the reproduction-related genes (e.g., sox9a, sox3, nr5a2, ndufc2, lztfl1, lhx8a, gata4, fmr1, ctnnb1) were highly methylated in the gonads of male-biased and female-biased families in both control and treatment conditions. Of these methylated genes, fmr1 and lztfl1 were associated with a strikingly high number of DMCs in all compared groups, over 288 genomic positions with fmr1 and 117 with lztfl1. Moreover, the methylation of some other reproduction-related genes, wt1a, prkcz, lhcgr, ints3, gsdf, was identified in the control group of both sex-biased families (Figure 8A), in which they were not differentially methylated in the treatment group. However, differential methylation of only one sex gene, nr5a1a, was found in the treatment group of both families (Figure 8B), whose methylation was not detected in the control group.

      Extending the consideration of candidate genes involved in epigenetic mechanisms in overlap between the two sex-biased families revealed that a subset of them, including wdr5, smarca5, shmt2, hdac4, hdac11, h1m, gadd45aa, dnmt3bb.1, and dimt1l, were differentially methylated in different compared groups, where dnmt3bb.1 and h1m were identified only in the control and in the treatment group, respectively (Figures 8A,B). In general, the corresponding evidence for Figures 7, 8 may not be considered informative and conclusive regarding differences in the methylation levels for a few genes, whose log2 FC levels are in both negative and positive directions.

      Differentially Methylated Promoters in Sex-Biased Zebrafish Families

      Since the DNA methylation of the promoter region plays an important regulatory function and is often inversely associated with the transcription of the genes, it is an important biological concern to investigate the DNA methylation within gene promoters (Chen et al., 2017). In this regard, we applied a region-wise analysis approach, considering DMRs focusing on 2 kb upstream and 1 kb downstream of the TSS, which includes the promoter and 5′ upstream regions. A total of 2,977 gene promoters were covered in all samples and tested for differentially methylated promoters (DMPs, FDR < 0.05). We first compared the promoters in male-biased versus female-biased family within each gonad type and temperature conditions (Supplementary Figures 6, 7 and Supplementary Table 9, S12–15). The overall results showed that the male-biased family exhibited a higher number of hypermethylated promoters than the female-biased family in both ovaries and testes in control and treatment groups (Supplementary Figure 7). Further observations of the differences between the two sex-biased families in the promoters indicated that the total number of DMPs was higher in the testes than the ovaries in the control (44 vs. 16; Supplementary Figure 7) and treatment (47 vs. 40; Supplementary Figure 7) groups. Consideration of the temperature effect on DMPs comparing male-biased and female-biased families revealed that the DNA methylation changes of the promoters in the treatment groups were greater than those in the control groups.

      We then compared the promoters in testes versus ovaries within each sex-biased family in control and in temperature conditions (Supplementary Figures 8, 9 and Supplementary Tables 9, S16–19). The overall results showed a distinct difference of DMPs in testes versus ovaries within both sex-biased families, where the testes exhibited more hypermethylated promoters than the ovaries in both male-biased and female-biased families in control and treatment groups (Supplementary Figure 9). A close observation of DMPs within the male-biased family revealed a total number of 481 hypermethylated promoters in the control group and 492 hypermethylated promoters in the treatment group. Similarly, a total number of 495 hypermethylated promoters in the control group and 478 hypermethylated promoters in the treatment group of the female-biased family was observed. Consideration of the effect of temperature on DNA methylation changes of the promoters in testes versus ovaries revealed a lower total number of DMPs in the treatment group compared to the control group in the male-biased (809 vs. 967) and in the female-biased (913 vs. 958) families, resulting from higher hypomethylated promoters in the treatment group, although the number of hypermethylated promoters was higher than that of hypomethylated promoters in both families.

      Genes Associated With DNA Methylation Changes of Promoters

      To find the effect of DNA methylation changes on gene promoters, we compared testes versus ovaries in male-biased and female-biased families, resulting in the detection of unique genes (family-specific genes) in each family and common genes in overlap between the two sex-biased families (Figures 9A,B). The results of Venn diagram showed 180 unique genes in the male-biased family and 171 unique genes in the female-biased family in the control group, indicating more methylated unique genes in the male-biased family than the female-biased family in the control group (Figure 9A). However, the same comparison in the treatment group revealed considerably more methylated unique genes in the female-biased family (221 genes) than the male-biased family (117 genes) (Figure 9B). The corresponding significance level (FDR < 0.05) of all identified unique genes in each sex-biased family is shown in Figures 9C–F. Of these genes, the top significant unique genes (FDR < 0.001) of the male-biased and the female-biased families in the control and in the treatment groups are shown in the bar charts. The bar charts revealed that a larger number of the top significant unique genes in the control group of the two sex-biased families were hypomethylated (Figures 9C,D). However, in the treatment group, more of the top significant unique genes in the male-biased family were hypermethylated than to the female-biased family (Figures 9E,F).

      Genes associated with the significantly differentially methylated promoters comparing testes versus ovaries within sex-biased families. Venn diagrams illustrate the differences in methylated gene promoters comparing male-biased and female-biased families in the control (A) and treatment (B) groups. Bar charts illustrate the level of the significance (FDR < 0.05) for all unique genes in each sex-biased family, and the differentially methylated of top significant unique gene promoters with FDR < 0.001 in male-biased and female-biased families, as classified in Venn diagram, in different experimental groups: (C) Male control male-biased versus female control male-biased (MCMB vs. FCMB); (D) Male control female-biased versus female control female-biased (MCFB vs. FCFB); (E) Male treatment male-biased versus female treatment male-biased (MTMB vs. FTMB); (F) Male treatment female-biased versus female treatment female-biased (MTFB vs. FTFB).

      Consideration of the overlap between candidate genes and methylated unique gene promoters in each sex-biased family (Figures 9A,B) revealed the methylation of nabp1a and sox9b in the control group and histh1l and nabp1a in the treatment group of only male-biased family, where their methylated promoters were not detected in the female-biased family (Figures 10A,B). A further investigation of the overlap between candidate genes and common genes in both sex-biased families, 787 genes in the control group (Figure 9A) and 691 genes in the treatment group (Figure 9B), showed a subset of candidate genes, including amh, hdac4, lhcgr, mc4r, pemt, wt1a exhibited hypermethylated promoters in the two sex-biased families (Figure 10).

      Candidate genes associated with significantly differentially methylated promoters in male-biased and female-biased families. (A) male control male-biased versus female control male-biased (MCMB vs. FCMB); male control female-biased versus female control female-biased (MCFB vs. FCFB). (B) male treatment male-biased versus female treatment male-biased (MTMB vs. FTMB); male treatment female-biased versus female treatment female-biased (MTFB vs. FTFB). The x-axis represents the candidate genes and the y-axis indicates mean fold change (log2 FC) per gene. Genes involved in epigenetic mechanisms are marked with an asterisk (*). Other genes are reproduction-related genes.

      Functional Annotation Analysis of Differentially Methylated Genes

      The annotated genes associated with DMCs in the comparison between the male-biased and female-biased families of zebrafish (Figures 4, 6) were subjected to functional enrichment analysis (see Materials and Methods). The results of the functional analysis represent the biological function of the identified differentially methylated genes in the pathway and Gene Ontology (GO) categories. The important five GOs and pathways (p < 0.05) associated with the reproduction and epigenetic mechanisms in zebrafish gonad in the male-biased and female-biased families, based on the presented results in Figures 4, 6, are shown in Figures 11, 12. The complete lists of enriched GOs and pathways are provided in Supplementary Tables 10 and 11.

      Enriched GOs and pathways in male-biased versus female-biased family. The results of biological functional annotation analysis of genes associated with DMCs in male-biased versus female-biased family in different experimental groups: (I) female control male-biased versus female control female-biased (FCMB vs. FCFB); (II) male control male-biased versus male control female-biased (MCMB vs. MCFB); (III) female treatment male-biased versus female treatment female-biased (FTMB vs. FTFB); (IV) male treatment male-biased versus male treatment female-biased (MTMB vs. MTFB). (A) Bar charts represent the significant enriched GOs (p < 0.05). The vertical axis represents the most important enriched GOs and the horizontal axis represents the number of significantly differentially methylated genes in each GO term. (B) Scatter plots illustrate the significant enriched pathways (p < 0.05). The vertical axis represents the enriched pathway categories and the horizontal axis represents the rich factor of the enriched pathways. Rich factor is the ratio of differentially methylated gene number enriched in the pathway to the total gene number in a certain pathway. The size and colour of dots represent the gene number and the range of p-values, respectively.

      Enriched GOs and pathways in testes versus ovaries. The results of biological functional annotation analysis of genes associated with DMCs in testes versus ovaries within male-biased and female-biased families in different experimental groups: (I) male control male-biased versus female control male-biased (MCMB vs. FCMB); (II) male control female-biased versus female control female-biased (MCFB vs. FCFB); (III) male treatment male-biased versus female treatment male-biased (MTMB vs. FTMB); (IV) male treatment female-biased versus female treatment female-biased (MTFB vs. FTFB). (A) Bar charts represent the significant enriched GOs (p < 0.05). The vertical axis represents the most important enriched GOs and the horizontal axis represents the number of significantly differentially methylated genes in each GO term. (B) Scatter plots illustrate the significant enriched pathways (p < 0.05). The vertical axis represents the enriched pathway categories and the horizontal axis represents the rich factor of the enriched pathways. Rich factor is the ratio of differentially methylated gene number enriched in the pathway to the total gene number in a certain pathway. The size and colour of dots represent the gene number and the range of p-values, respectively.

      The enriched GOs and pathways in the male-biased versus female-biased family differed markedly for both testes and ovaries as well as for control and treatment groups (Figure 11 and Supplementary Table 10, S20–27). Consideration of the enriched GOs for testes and ovaries comparing the male-biased versus female-biased family of zebrafish revealed a number of significant GOs such as developmental process in reproduction, sex determination, oocyte maturation, sexual reproduction, and regulation of Wnt signaling pathway for ovaries, and negative regulation of Wnt signaling pathway, negative regulation of histone modification, and apoptotic DNA fragmentation for testes (Figure 11A). The result of the pathway analysis showed the overrepresentation of the important pathways for ovarian development, namely signaling by Wnt, TCF dependent signaling in response to Wnt, and G alpha signaling events. The same analysis revealed the enrichment of several significant pathways for testes development, including cell cycle, regulation of apoptosis, and transcriptional regulation by TP53 (Figure 11B).

      The enriched GOs and pathways in the testes versus ovaries revealed a considerable number of different GOs and pathways for each sex-biased family in the control and temperature groups (Figure 12 and Supplementary Table 11, S28–35). The results of unique and nonredundant GOs showed the enrichment of significant GOs for each sex-biased family such as chromatin organization, regulation of canonical Wnt signaling, oogenesis, and histone deacetylation for male-biased family, and Wnt signaling pathway, regulation of apoptotic process, and negative regulation of Wnt signaling pathway for female-biased family (Figure 12A). Similarly, the result of unique and nonredundant pathways revealed the overrepresentation of important pathways involved in zebrafish sex determination in the male-biased family such as NF-κB activated and signals survival, activation of the AP-1 family of transcription factor, and beta-catenin independent Wnt signaling. The overrepresented pathways in the female-biased family indicated enrichment of genes involved in several sex-determining pathways, namely apoptosis, signaling by Wnt, and negative regulation of the P13K/AKT network (Figure 12B).

      The results of functional analysis of genes with differentially methylated promoters (Supplementary Figure 8) in testes versus ovaries of the two sex-biased families have been illustrated in Supplementary Tables 12 and 13. Our results revealed the enrichment of GOs involved in reproduction and epigenetic regulatory mechanisms in the male-biased family, namely negative regulation of canonical Wnt signaling pathway, regulation of oocyte development, and negative regulation of chromatin silencing. Likewise, we identified several important reproductive-related GOs in the female-biased family such as reproduction, spermidine acetylation, and regulation of non-canonical Wnt signaling pathway. The result of pathway analysis showed overrepresentation of several reproductive regulatory pathways in the male-biased family such as apoptosis, stabilization of p53, and TNFR2 non-canonical NF-κB pathway. However, in the female-biased family, we found only two pathways, including signaling by Wnt and processing of capped intron-containing pre-mRNA.

      Discussion Wide Variation of Sex Ratio Among Zebrafish Families

      In this study, we used zebrafish as a model animal to characterize sex ratio variation among different families and compared genome-wide DNA methylation in male-biased and female-biased families to gain new insights into the epigenetic regulatory mechanisms underlying sexual plasticity. Our findings on sex ratio variation among different families of this domesticated zebrafish strain support previous observations of the PSD system in domesticated zebrafish strains (Abozaid et al., 2011, 2012; Ribas et al., 2017a; Hosseini et al., 2019a; Valdivieso et al., 2020). In our previous study with the same temperature treatment conception during embryonic development (Hosseini et al., 2019a), a reduction in survival ability was observed up to 24 hpf compared to the pre-treatment stage at 5 hpf, with a significant lower survival ability in treated group (73.30% ± 0.58% in control vs. 70.19% ± 0.57% in treated group). However, this difference between control and treated groups was not very pronounced (3.1%), indicating that the observed mortality was not due to high temperature during the treatment period (Hosseini et al., 2019a). The same observation was reported in the study by Ribas et al. (2017a), in which different zebrafish families were exposed to high temperature during larval stage. Therefore, the sex ratio observed in different families in this study could not be due to sex-specific mortality.

      A breeding experiment in a large number of domesticated zebrafish families revealed that broods derived from the same breeding pair exhibited similar sex ratio between repeated crosses, suggesting that sex in zebrafish is a heritable trait and parental genotypes have a strong influence on offspring sex ratio (Liew et al., 2012). This evidence indicated a genetic sex determination system in domesticated zebrafish strains, which can be influenced by environmental factors. In species with a chromosomal sex determination system, the chance of such sex-biased families occurring is likely to be very low because the sex ratio tends to stay at 1:1 under natural selection (Fisher, 1930), thereby a skewed sex ratio always returns to an equal ratio of males and females in the next generation (Liew et al., 2012; Fryxell et al., 2015). However, a PSD system can interact with environmental factors, resulting in alteration of the individual sexual phenotype and consequently producing offspring with a skewed sex ratio in a population. The PSD system, involving multiple autosomal genes, requires a complex regulatory network for proper sexual development (Liew and Orban, 2014). In these processes, epigenetic regulatory mechanisms including DNA methylation, histone modification, and non-coding RNAs likely contribute to sex determination and reproductive organ development (Piferrer, 2013; Liew and Orban, 2014). Given that a wide variety of sex ratio was observed in different zebrafish families in this study, we propose that an epigenetic mechanism may influence the directions of gonadal development, resulting in skewed sex ratio in the offspring and generating sex-biased families.

      Role of Epigenetic Modification in Regulating Differences Between Sex-Biased Families

      The expression of different phenotypes is encoded not only by the genetic information of the DNA sequence, but also by epigenetic modifications of chromatin structures including DNA methylation and alterations of histone proteins that bind DNA to regulate gene expression (Barros and Offenbacher, 2009). The associations between DNA methylation changes and genetic sequence on gene expression between individuals revealed the interdependence of genetic and epigenetic variations on the level of gene expression. The role of DNA methylation can be dependent on genomic and molecular structure of DNA (Gutierrez-Arcelus et al., 2013). In addition, DNA methylation and gene expression levels can be influenced by transcription factors, whose binding levels can be determined by differences in abundance and genetic variants at their binding sites (Gutierrez-Arcelus et al., 2013). Genetic information and epigenetic marks of the genome are not completely separate streams that influence phenotypic expression, but functionally interdependent (Richards, 2006; Richards et al., 2017; Adrian-Kalchhauser et al., 2020). Allelic variants of genes can influence induction of epigenetic marks, whereby the genetically distinct lines of the same species exhibit different effects of parental conditions on the progeny phenotypes (Adrian-Kalchhauser et al., 2020). Inherited gene regulation, which consists of all inherited factors that alter gene expression, from parents to offspring is not fully independent of DNA sequence (Adrian-Kalchhauser et al., 2020). Studies revealed that parental DNA methylation erased during germ cell development in mammals, whereas the paternal methylation is largely preserved in zebrafish (Ortega-Recalde et al., 2019; Skvortsova et al., 2019). In consist with previous findings, our observations in this study demonstrated that the family-specific differences in the genetic mechanism of sex determination can be attributed to the differences in epigenetic markers depending on inter-family genomic variation in this fish species. However, further experiments of interconnectedness of genetic component and epigenetic marks will enhance our understanding of genome function and induction of sexual phenotypic plasticity in this model animal.

      Epigenetic marks can also be influenced by environmental factors (Kaminsky et al., 2009). Epigenetically regulated sex determination in response to the environment plays a key role in phenotypic plasticity. Species can modulate adaptive responses to environmental changes during evolution by retaining the epigenetic memory of environmental conditions experienced by their parents. Sex ratio variation mediated by epigenetic regulatory mechanisms in species with G × E may lead to maladaptive changes, resulting in a skewed sex ratio in the population (Le Galliard et al., 2005; Kronholm and Collins, 2015; Consuegra and Lopez, 2016). Taking into account that the sex ratio in domesticated zebrafish is family-specific (Liew et al., 2012; Ribas et al., 2017a), it could be influenced by epigenetic mechanisms, resulting in phenotypic sexual plasticity induced by environmental factors (Consuegra and Lopez, 2016; Valdivieso et al., 2020). Our study on DNA methylation in sex-biased zebrafish families revealed that the male-biased family exhibited strikingly higher number of methylated sites than the female-biased family in both testes and ovaries (Figure 4). Our further findings of the effect of epigenetic modifications within each sex-biased family demonstrated that testes exhibited considerably higher hypermethylated CpGs than the ovaries within both male-biased and female-biased families (Figure 6). Our observations suggest that the sex ratio variation in sex-biased zebrafish families with different genetic backgrounds of sex determination is influenced by epigenetic mechanisms.

      Transgenerational inheritance of epigenetic modifications associated with differential DNA methylation regions (epimutations) is a plastic memory of organisms for phenotypic changes that can be transmitted to subsequent generations and cannot be explained by changes in primary DNA sequence and Mendelian genetics (Youngson and Whitelaw, 2008; Daxinger and Whitelaw, 2010, 2012; Shao et al., 2014; Skinner et al., 2014). Epigenetic inheritance in mammals revealed that the majority of environmentally induced epigenetic marks are erased and reset between generations (Daxinger and Whitelaw 2010, 2012; Feng et al., 2010). Unlike mammals, studies in zebrafish confirmed the heredity of the parental DNA methylome in the offspring through the sperm, which is not reset in early embryonic development (Macleod et al., 1999; Jiang et al., 2013; Potok et al., 2013). During the crucial time windows of embryonic development in zebrafish (50% epiboly to Prim-5, Kimmel et al., 1995; Abozaid et al., 2011; Hosseini et al., 2019a), the time windows that investigated in this study, the primordial germ cells could have been mostly affected by environmental temperature (Abozaid et al., 2011; Hosseini et al., 2019a) and would therefore be potentially more susceptible to establish novel environmentally induced DNA methylation patterns.

      Genes Associated With Genome-Wide DNA Methylation Changes

      Epigenetic mechanisms such as DNA methylation can affect gene expression and regulate phenotypic sexual dimorphism in a sex-determining pathway (Lister et al., 2009; Feng et al., 2010; Zemach et al., 2010; Moore et al., 2013). Our results of chromosome-wise distribution of genes associated with DNA methylation changes revealed seven genes were common in all compared groups with a distinct family-biased methylation effect, including viml, mvb12bb, pitpnb, rtn1a, sp8b, olfml2ba, and fbxl22, located on chromosome 2, 8, 10, 13, 16, 20, and 25, respectively (Figure 5). The chromosomal distribution of these family-biased genes showed a biased methylation effect in testes and ovaries under both temperature conditions.

      We also identified the family-specific genes (unique genes) within each sex-biased family comparing the testes and ovaries, where the male-biased family exhibited higher hypermethylated CpGs than the female-biased family, especially in the group exposed to high temperature (Figure 7). Therefore, we speculate that the family-related genes (family-biased and/or family-specific) may influence the activation of reproductive-related genes in downstream pathways to follow the trend of sex determination toward maleness or femaleness, thereby leading to a skewed sex ratio in the population. However, further experiments are required to validate our findings.

      The phenotypic divergence between the two sexes requires sex-specific gene regulation and differential sex-biased gene expression because both sexes share the same genome (except for sex chromosomes), which can be influenced by epigenetic regulatory mechanisms (Ghiselli et al., 2012; Grath and Parsch, 2016). In agreement with previous evidence, our further findings also showed the effect of DNA methylation changes on candidate sex-related genes studied here in the zebrafish gonad (Figure 8), suggesting that the epigenetic modifications may influence sex-determining gene expression. Among the differentially methylated candidate reproductive genes, fmr1 showed the highest number of associated DMCs in both families. This gene is involved in spermatogenesis and has a function in RNA regulation, which directly affects reproductive outcome by regulating the DNA damage response during spermatogenesis (Akemann et al., 2019). Other important genes involved in testicular differentiation and spermatogenesis with high methylated sites such as lztfl1, sox9a, sox3, and gata4 were also identified in our study. For example, sox9a is a candidate pro-male gene that along with dmrt1 and amh may have a function in Sertoli cell differentiation during zebrafish sex determination (Lee et al., 2017; Webster et al., 2017). Consistent with previous findings on the function of sox9a in zebrafish testes, we observed hypermethylation of this gene in testes versus ovaries, which may have an impact on the regulation of its expression. Likewise, the methylation of sex-biased genes involved in ovarian differentiation and folliculogenesis, such as ctnnb1 and lhx8a (Lee et al., 2017; Hosseini et al., 2019b), was also observed in our analysis. Notably, the methylation of the sex-biased genes showed that some of them, including wt1a, prkcz, lhcgr, ints3, and gsdf, were methylated only in the control group of both families, where for instance wt1a and gsdf have a known function in sex determination and gonad differentiation of male zebrafish (Lee et al., 2017). However, contrary to the control group, methylation of only one gene, nr5a1a, which has a function in steroidogenesis, was detected in the treatment group of both families. The same is true for candidate genes involved in epigenetic mechanisms, where dnmt3bb.1 is identified only in the control group and h1m only in the treatment group. Dnmt3bb.1 is a DNA methyltransferase gene involved in the establishment of DNA methylation patterns during zebrafish gametogenesis (Campos et al., 2012; Akemann et al., 2019). However, the linker histone h1m gene is involved in encoding histone variants and is expressed in the primordial germ cells of the zebrafish gonad (Müller et al., 2002; Lee et al., 2017). Taken together, these results represent novel insights into the effect of DNA methylation changes on genes in zebrafish gonad in different sex-biased families, which can influence the phenotypic sexual dimorphism, resulting in imbalanced sex ratio in the population and provide a valuable resource of candidate genes for further research. The association between DNA methylation changes of the candidate genes studied here and gene expression requires further experiment.

      Methylation of Gene Promoters in Sex-Biased Families

      Given that the DNA methylation of promoters as a functional regulatory element of the genome is highly related to gene expression (Lister et al., 2009; Feng et al., 2010; Zemach et al., 2010; Chen et al., 2017), we pursued the DNA methylation pattern in gene promoters of both sex-biased zebrafish families. Our results showed more hypermethylated promoters in the male-biased family than the female-biased family and a high number of DMPs in the testes compared with the ovaries (Supplementary Figures 6, 8). Studies of DNA methylation changes in sex-related gene promoters such as cyp19a1a in fish species showed different methylation patterns during folliculogenesis in olive flounder, Paralichthys olivaceus (Si et al., 2016) and zebrafish (Bai et al., 2016). Likewise, a study of DNA methylation changes in cyp19a1a promoter in European sea bass, Dicentrarchus labrax, results in suppression of its expression and male sexual development when incubated at high ambient temperature during early development (Navarro-Martin et al., 2011). In addition to single gene studies, research on genome-wide DNA methylation in fish species, such as the half-smooth tongue sole, revealed the effect of epigenetic regulatory mechanisms on the suppression of female-specific gene expression under high temperature, resulting in environmentally induced sex reversal (Shao et al., 2014). Global DNA methylation in Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus, also represented an increase in the methylation levels of different chromosomes in both sexes in elevated temperature-exposed fish compared to the control group (Sun et al., 2016). A recent study on the genetic mechanisms underlying sex determination in European sea bass and its interaction with high ambient temperature revealed that temperature exposure leads to hypomethylation of sox3 gene, resulting in up-regulation of its expression in both testes and ovaries (Geffroy et al., 2021). However, the DNA methylation level of sox9a was increased only in the testes, but no significant difference was observed in the ovaries. Interestingly, the standard association between the hypermethylation and down-regulation of gene expression was not detected for sox9a in the testes at high temperature condition (Geffroy et al., 2021). Altogether, previous studies have verified the effect of DNA methylation changes on promoters of sex-biased genes in the regulation of two different sexes and in the generation of environmentally induced sex reversal mediated by temperature. In this study, we reported unique evidence for DNA methylation changes of gene promoters in different sex-biased zebrafish families under two temperature conditions (Figure 9), which may regulate a family-biased sex ratio.

      Our further investigation of candidate genes comparing the two sex-biased families showed that the promoters of some reproduction- and epigenetic-related genes, including nabp1a, histh1l, and sox9b were methylated only in the male-biased family, that were not detected in the female-biased family (Figure 10). Of these genes, hypermethylation of only the histh1l, a histone variant gene, was detected in the high incubation temperature group of the male-biased family, which may play a role in sexual development towards maleness. Consistent with our observation here, a previous study demonstrated the upregulation of histh1l in zebrafish testes compared to ovaries (Lee et al., 2017).

      Conclusion

      In summary, we found more DNA methylation in the male-biased family than the female-biased family and a high number of methylated positions in the testes than the ovaries. The effect of ambient temperature also showed more methylation at the high incubation temperature than the control temperature. These observations lead us to conclude that the DNA methylation changes may influence sexual phenotypic plasticity as a response to the environmental conditions. Our study provides new insights into the epigenetic mechanisms underlying sex-biased zebrafish families and improves our understanding of sex ratio variation in species with G × E mechanism of sex determination in evolutionary developmental biology.

      Data Availability Statement

      The datasets presented in this study can be found in online repositories. The names of the repository/repositories and accession number(s) can be found here: https://osf.io/bax9y/. Further use of the datasets generated and analysed in this study requires the consent of the first corresponding author (SH).

      Ethics Statement

      All procedures in this study were approved by the Animal Welfare Committee of the University of Goettingen for the care and use of animals under permission number T2-2018int in accordance with the German Animal Welfare Act.

      Author Contributions

      SH and ARS designed the study and conception. SH wrote the manuscript. SH, NT, and ARS performed the computational data analysis and interpreted the data and results. NT performed laboratory analysis and sequencing. JT, KW, and B.B. contributed to the interpretation of the results. MH, HS, JT, KW, NT, ARS, and BB reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

      Funding

      This research work received financial support from the H. Wilhelm Schaumann Foundation, Hamburg, Germany.

      Conflict of Interest

      The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

      Publisher’s Note

      All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

      We are deeply grateful to the H. Wilhelm Schaumann Foundation for the financial support of this project. We thank staffs of the Aquaculture and Aquatic Ecology Division of the University of Goettingen for providing the animals and the possibility to use the aquaculture facilities. We thank staffs of the sequencing facility of Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN) for DNA library preparation and sequencing. We acknowledge support from the Open Access Publication Funds of the University of Goettingen.

      Supplementary Material

      The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: /articles/10.3389/fcell.2022.880779/full#supplementary-material

      References Abozaid H. Wessels S. Hörstgen-Schwark G. (2011). Effect of Rearing Temperatures during Embryonic Development on the Phenotypic Sex in Zebrafish (Danio rerio). Sex. Dev. 5, 259265. 10.1159/000330120 Abozaid H. Wessels S. Hörstgen-Schwark G. (2012). Elevated Temperature Applied during Gonadal Transformation Leads to Male Bias in Zebrafish (Danio rerio). Sex. Dev. 6, 201209. 10.1159/000336297 Adrian-Kalchhauser I. Sultan S. E. Shama L. N. S. Spence-Jones H. Tiso S. Keller Valsecchi C. I. (2020). Understanding 'Non-Genetic' Inheritance: Insights from Molecular-Evolutionary Crosstalk. Trends Ecol. Evol. 35, 10781089. 10.1016/j.tree.2020.08.011 Akemann C. Meyer D. N. Gurdziel K. Baker T. R. (2019). Developmental Dioxin Exposure Alters the Methylome of Adult Male Zebrafish Gonads. Front. Genet. 9, 719. 10.3389/fgene.2018.00719 Alexa A. Rahnenfuhrer J. (2020). topGO: Enrichment Analysis for Gene Ontology. R Package Version 2.42.0. Amores A. Postlethwait J. H. (1999). Banded Chromosomes and the Zebrafish Karyotype. Methods Cell Biol. 60, 323338. 10.1016/s0091-679x(08)61908-1 Bai J. Gong W. Wang C. Gao Y. Hong W. Chen S. X. (2016). Dynamic Methylation Pattern of Cyp19a1a Core Promoter during Zebrafish Ovarian Folliculogenesis. Fish. Physiol. Biochem. 42, 947954. 10.1007/s10695-015-0187-x Barros S. P. Offenbacher S. (2009). Epigenetics: Connecting Environment and Genotype to Phenotype and Disease. J. Dent. Res. 88, 400408. 10.1177/0022034509335868 Benjamini Y. Hochberg Y. (1995). Controlling the False Discovery Rate: a Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Methodol. 57, 289300. 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x Bird A. P. (1986). CpG-rich Islands and the Function of DNA Methylation. Nature 321, 209213. 10.1038/321209a0 Campos C. Valente L. M. P. Fernandes J. M. O. (2012). Molecular Evolution of Zebrafish DNMT3 Genes and Thermal Plasticity of Their Expression during Embryonic Development. Gene 500, 93100. 10.1016/j.gene.2012.03.041 Cavalieri V. Spinelli G. (2017). Environmental Epigenetics in Zebrafish. Epigenet. Chromatin 10, 46. 10.1186/s13072-017-0154-0 Chen Y. Pal B. Visvader J. E. Smyth G. K. (2017). Differential Methylation Analysis of Reduced Representation Bisulfite Sequencing Experiments Using edgeR. F1000Res 6, 2055. 10.12688/f1000research.13196.1 Consuegra S. Lopez C. M. R. (2016). Epigenetic-induced Alterations in Sex-Ratios in Response to Climate Change: An Epigenetic Trap? Bioessays 38, 950958. 10.1002/bies.201600058 Daxinger L. Whitelaw E. (2010). Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: More Questions Than Answers. Genome Res. 20, 16231628. 10.1101/gr.106138.110 Daxinger L. Whitelaw E. (2012). Understanding Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance via the Gametes in Mammals. Nat. Rev. Genet. 13, 153162. 10.1038/nrg3188 Detrich H. W. Zon I. L. Westerfield M. (2004). The Zebrafish: Genetics, Genomics and Informatics. 2nd ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Devlin R. H. Nagahama Y. (2002). Sex Determination and Sex Differentiation in Fish: An Overview of Genetic, Physiological, and Environmental Influences. Aquaculture 208, 191364. 10.1016/s0044-8486(02)00057-1 Feng S. Cokus S. J. Zhang X. Chen P.-Y. Bostick M. Goll M. G. (2010). Conservation and Divergence of Methylation Patterning in Plants and Animals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107, 86898694. 10.1073/pnas.1002720107 Fisher R. A. (1930). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. Fryxell D. C. Arnett H. A. Apgar T. M. Kinnison M. T. Palkovacs E. P. (2015). Sex Ratio Variation Shapes the Ecological Effects of a Globally Introduced Freshwater Fish. Proc. R. Soc. B 282, 20151970. 10.1098/rspb.2015.1970 Geffroy B. Besson M. Sánchez-Baizán N. Clota F. Goikoetxea A. Sadoul B. (2021). Unraveling the Genotype by Environment Interaction in a Thermosensitive Fish with a Polygenic Sex Determination System. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 118, e2112660118. 10.1073/pnas.2112660118 Ghiselli F. Milani L. Chang P. L. Hedgecock D. Davis J. P. Nuzhdin S. V. (2012). De Novo assembly of the Manila Clam Ruditapes Philippinarum Transcriptome Provides New Insights into Expression Bias, Mitochondrial Doubly Uniparental Inheritance and Sex Determination. Mol. Biol. Evol. 29, 771786. 10.1093/molbev/msr248 Grath S. Parsch J. (2016). Sex-Biased Gene Expression. Annu. Rev. Genet. 50, 2944. 10.1146/annurev-genet-120215-035429 Gutierrez-Arcelus M. Lappalainen T. Montgomery S. B. Buil A. Ongen H. Yurovsky A. (2013). Passive and Active DNA Methylation and the Interplay with Genetic Variation in Gene Regulation. Elife 2, e00523. 10.7554/eLife.00523 Holleley C. E. Sarre S. D. O'Meally D. Georges A. (2016). Sex Reversal in Reptiles: Reproductive Oddity or Powerful Driver of Evolutionary Change? Sex. Dev. 10, 279287. 10.1159/000450972 Hosseini S. Brenig B. Tetens J. Sharifi A. R. (2019a). Phenotypic Plasticity Induced Using High Ambient Temperature during Embryogenesis in Domesticated Zebrafish, Danio rerio . Reprod. Dom. Anim. 54, 435444. 10.1111/rda.13382 Hosseini S. Ha N.-T. Simianer H. Falker-Gieske C. Brenig B. Franke A. (2019b). Genetic Mechanism Underlying Sexual Plasticity and its Association with Colour Patterning in Zebrafish (Danio rerio). BMC Genomics 20, 341. 10.1186/s12864-019-5722-1 Jiang L. Zhang J. Wang J.-J. Wang L. Zhang L. Li G. (2013). Sperm, but Not Oocyte, DNA Methylome Is Inherited by Zebrafish Early Embryos. Cell 153, 773784. 10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.041 Kaminsky Z. A. Tang T. Wang S.-C. Ptak C. Oh G. H. T. Wong A. H. C. (2009). DNA Methylation Profiles in Monozygotic and Dizygotic Twins. Nat. Genet. 41, 240245. 10.1038/ng.286 Kimmel C. B. Ballard W. W. Kimmel S. R. Ullmann B. Schilling T. F. (1995). Stages of Embryonic Development of the Zebrafish. Dev. Dyn. 203, 253310. 10.1002/aja.1002030302 Kronholm I. Collins S. (2015). Epigenetic Mutations Can Both Help and Hinder Adaptive Evolution. Mol. Ecol. 25, 18561868. 10.1111/mec.13296 Le Galliard J.-F. Fitze P. S. Ferrière R. Clobert J. (2005). Sex Ratio Bias, Male Aggression, and Population Collapse in Lizards. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102, 1823118236. 10.1073/pnas.0505172102 Lee S. L. J. Horsfield J. A. Black M. A. Rutherford K. Fisher A. Gemmell N. J. (2017). Histological and Transcriptomic Effects of 17α-Methyltestosterone on Zebrafish Gonad Development. BMC Genomics 18, 557. 10.1186/s12864-017-3915-z Liew W. C. Orban L. (2014). Zebrafish Sex: A Complicated Affair. Briefings Funct. Genomics 13, 172187. 10.1093/bfgp/elt041 Liew W. C. Bartfai R. Lim Z. Sreenivasan R. Siegfried K. R. Orban L. (2012). Polygenic Sex Determination System in Zebrafish. PLoS One 7, e34397. 10.1371/journal.pone.0034397 Lister R. Pelizzola M. Dowen R. H. Hawkins R. D. Hon G. Tonti-Filippini J. (2009). Human DNA Methylomes at Base Resolution Show Widespread Epigenomic Differences. Nature 462, 315322. 10.1038/nature08514 Littell R. C. Milliken G. A. Stroup W. W. Wolfinger R. D. Schabenberger O. (2006). SAS for Mixed Models. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. Liu W. Li S.-Z. Li Z. Wang Y. Li X.-Y. Zhong J.-X. (2015). Complete Depletion of Primordial Germ Cells in an All-Female Fish Leads to Sex-Biased Gene Expression Alteration and Sterile All-Male Occurrence. BMC Genomics 16, 971. 10.1186/s12864-015-2130-z Macleod D. Clark V. H. Bird A. (1999). Absence of Genome-wide Changes in DNA Methylation during Development of the Zebrafish. Nat. Genet. 23, 139140. 10.1038/13767 Mank J. E. Avise J. C. (2009). Evolutionary Diversity and Turn-Over of Sex Determination in Teleost Fishes. Sex. Dev. 3, 6067. 10.1159/000223071 Mayne B. Korbie D. Kenchington L. Ezzy B. Berry O. Jarman S. (2020). A DNA Methylation Age Predictor for Zebrafish. Aging 12, 2481724835. 10.18632/aging.202400 Moore L. D. Le T. Fan G. (2013). DNA Methylation and its Basic Function. Neuropsychopharmacology 38, 2338. 10.1038/npp.2012.112 Müller K. Thisse C. Thisse B. Raz E. (2002). Expression of a Linker Histone-like Gene in the Primordial Germ Cells in Zebrafish. Mech. Dev. 117, 253257. 10.1016/s0925-4773(02)00174-0 Narita S. Kageyama D. Nomura M. Fukatsu T. (2007). Unexpected Mechanism of Symbiont-Induced Reversal of Insect Sex: Feminizing Wolbachia Continuously Acts on the Butterfly Eurema Hecabe during Larval Development. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 43324341. 10.1128/aem.00145-07 Navarro-Martín L. Viñas J. Ribas L. Díaz N. Gutiérrez A. Di Croce L. (2011). DNA Methylation of the Gonadal Aromatase (Cyp19a) Promoter Is Involved in Temperature-dependent Sex Ratio Shifts in the European Sea Bass. PLoS Genet. 7, e1002447. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002447 Ortega-Recalde O. Day R. C. Gemmell N. J. Hore T. A. (2019). Zebrafish Preserve Global Germline DNA Methylation while Sex-Linked rDNA Is Amplified and Demethylated during Feminisation. Nat. Commun. 10, 3053. 10.1038/s41467-019-10894-7 Ospina-Alvarez N. Piferrer F. (2008). Temperature-Dependent Sex Determination in Fish Revisited: Prevalence, a Single Sex Ratio Response Pattern, and Possible Effects of Climate Change. PLoS One 3, e2837. 10.1371/journal.pone.0002837 Penman D. J. Piferrer F. (2008). Fish Gonadogenesis. Part I: Genetic and Environmental Mechanisms of Sex Determination. Rev. Fish. Sci. 16, 1634. 10.1080/10641260802324610 Piferrer F. Ribas L. Díaz N. (2012). Genomic Approaches to Study Genetic and Environmental Influences on Fish Sex Determination and Differentiation. Mar. Biotechnol. 14, 591604. 10.1007/s10126-012-9445-4 Piferrer F. Anastasiadi D. Valdivieso A. Sánchez-Baizán N. Moraleda-Prados J. Ribas L. (2019). The Model of the Conserved Epigenetic Regulation of Sex. Front. Genet. 10, 857. 10.3389/fgene.2019.00857 Piferrer F. (2013). Epigenetics of Sex Determination and Gonadogenesis. Dev. Dyn. 242, 360370. 10.1002/dvdy.23924 Potok M. E. Nix D. A. Parnell T. J. Cairns B. R. (2013). Reprogramming the Maternal Zebrafish Genome after Fertilization to Match the Paternal Methylation Pattern. Cell 153, 759772. 10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.030 Quinn A. E. Georges A. Sarre S. D. Guarino F. Ezaz T. Graves J. A. M. (2007). Temperature Sex Reversal Implies Sex Gene Dosage in a Reptile. Science 316, 411. 10.1126/science.1135925 R Core Team (2015). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.r-project.org/ . Ribas L. Piferrer F. (2014). The Zebrafish (Danio rerio) as a Model Organism, with Emphasis on Applications for Finfish Aquaculture Research. Rev. Aquacult. 6, 209240. 10.1111/raq.12041 Ribas L. Liew W. C. Díaz N. Sreenivasan R. Orbán L. Piferrer F. (2017a). Heat-induced Masculinization in Domesticated Zebrafish Is Family-specific and Yields a Set of Different Gonadal Transcriptomes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 114, E941E950. 10.1073/pnas.1609411114 Ribas L. Vanezis K. Imués M. A. Piferrer F. (2017b). Treatment with a DNA Methyltransferase Inhibitor Feminizes Zebrafish and Induces Long-Term Expression Changes in the Gonads. Epigenet. Chromatin. 10, 59. 10.1186/s13072-017-0168-7 Ribas L. Valdivieso A. Díaz N. Piferrer F. (2017c). Response to "The Importance of Controlling Genetic Variation - Remarks on 'Appropriate Rearing Density in Domesticated Zebrafish to Avoid Masculinization: Links with the Stress Response'". J. Exp. Biol. 220, 40794080. 10.1242/jeb.167437 Richards C. L. Alonso C. Becker C. Bossdorf O. Bucher E. Colomé‐Tatché M. (2017). Ecological Plant Epigenetics: Evidence from Model and Non‐model Species, and the Way Forward. Ecol. Lett. 20, 15761590. 10.1111/ele.12858 Richards E. J. (2006). Inherited Epigenetic Variation - Revisiting Soft Inheritance. Nat. Rev. Genet. 7, 395401. 10.1038/nrg1834 Robinson M. D. McCarthy D. J. Smyth G. K. (2010). edgeR: a Bioconductor Package for Differential Expression Analysis of Digital Gene Expression Data. Bioinformatics 26, 139140. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp616 Senior A. M. Lokman P. M. Closs G. P. Nakagawa S. (2015). Ecological and Evolutionary Applications for Environmental Sex Reversal of Fish. Q. Rev. Biol. 90, 2344. 10.1086/679762 Shao C. Li Q. Chen S. Zhang P. Lian J. Hu Q. (2014). Epigenetic Modification and Inheritance in Sexual Reversal of Fish. Genome Res. 24, 604615. 10.1101/gr.162172.113 Shen Z.-G. Wang H.-P. (2014). Molecular Players Involved in Temperature-dependent Sex Determination and Sex Differentiation in Teleost Fish. Genet. Sel. Evol. 46, 26. 10.1186/1297-9686-46-26 Si Y. Ding Y. He F. Wen H. Li J. Zhao J. (2016). DNA Methylation Level of Cyp19a1a and Foxl2 Gene Related to Their Expression Patterns and Reproduction Traits during Ovary Development Stages of Japanese Flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus). Gene 575, 321330. 10.1016/j.gene.2015.09.006 Skinner M. K. Gurerrero-Bosagna C. Haque M. M. Nilsson E. E. Koop J. A. H. Knutie S. A. (2014). Epigenetics and the Evolution of Darwin's Finches. Genome Biol. Evol. 6, 19721989. 10.1093/gbe/evu158 Skvortsova K. Tarbashevich K. Stehling M. Lister R. Irimia M. Raz E. (2019). Retention of Paternal DNA Methylome in the Developing Zebrafish Germline. Nat. Commun. 10, 3054. 10.1038/s41467-019-10895-6 Stelkens R. B. Wedekind C. (2010). Environmental Sex Reversal, Trojan Sex Genes, and Sex Ratio Adjustment: Conditions and Population Consequences. Mol. Ecol. 19, 627646. 10.1111/j.1365-294x.2010.04526.x Sun L.-X. Wang Y.-Y. Zhao Y. Wang H. Li N. Ji X. S. (2016). Global DNA Methylation Changes in Nile tilapia Gonads during High Temperature-Induced Masculinization. PLoS One 11, e0158483. 10.1371/journal.pone.0158483 Uchida D. Yamashita M. Kitano T. Iguchi T. (2002). Oocyte Apoptosis during the Transition from Ovary-like Tissue to Testes during Sex Differentiation of Juvenile Zebrafish. J. Exp. Biol. 205, 711718. 10.1242/jeb.205.6.711 Valdivieso A. Ribas L. Monleón-Getino A. Orbán L. Piferrer F. (2020). Exposure of Zebrafish to Elevated Temperature Induces Sex Ratio Shifts and Alterations in the Testicular Epigenome of Unexposed Offspring. Environ. Res. 186, 109601. 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109601 Vance S. A. (1996). Morphological and Behavioural Sex Reversal in Mermithidinfected Mayflies. Proc. R. Soc. Lond B Biol. Sci. 263, 907912. Von Hertell U. Hörstgen-Schwark G. Langholz H.-J. Jung B. (1990). Family Studies on Genetic Variability in Growth and Reproductive Performance between and within Test Fish Populations of the Zebrafish (Brachydanio Rerio). Aquaculture 85, 307315. 10.1016/0044-8486(90)90029-m Wallace H. Badawy G. M. I. Wallace B. M. N. (1999). Amphibian Sex Determination and Sex Reversal. CMLS, Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 55, 901909. 10.1007/s000180050343 Wang X. G. Bartfai R. Sleptsova-Freidrich I. Orban L. (2007). The Timing and Extent of 'juvenile Ovary' Phase Are Highly Variable during Zebrafish Testis Differentiation. J. Fish. Biol. 70, 3344. 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2007.01363.x Webster K. A. Schach U. Ordaz A. Steinfeld J. S. Draper B. W. Siegfried K. R. (2017). Dmrt1 Is Necessary for Male Sexual Development in Zebrafish. Dev. Biol. 422, 3346. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2016.12.008 Wilson C. A. High S. K. McCluskey B. M. Amores A. Yan Y.-l. Titus T. A. (2014). Wild Sex in Zebrafish: Loss of the Natural Sex Determinant in Domesticated Strains. Genetics 198, 12911308. 10.1534/genetics.114.169284 Wu S.-F. Zhang H. Hammoud S. S. Potok M. Nix D. A. Jones D. A. (2011). DNA Methylation Profiling in Zebrafish. Methods Cell Biol. 104, 327339. 10.1016/b978-0-12-374814-0.00018-5 Youngson N. A. Whitelaw E. (2008). Transgenerational Epigenetic Effects. Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 9, 233257. 10.1146/annurev.genom.9.081307.164445 Zemach A. McDaniel I. E. Silva P. Zilberman D. (2010). Genome-wide Evolutionary Analysis of Eukaryotic DNA Methylation. Science 328, 916919. 10.1126/science.1186366
      ‘Oh, my dear Thomas, you haven’t heard the terrible news then?’ she said. ‘I thought you would be sure to have seen it placarded somewhere. Alice went straight to her room, and I haven’t seen her since, though I repeatedly knocked at the door, which she has locked on the inside, and I’m sure it’s most unnatural of her not to let her own mother comfort her. It all happened in a moment: I have always said those great motor-cars shouldn’t be allowed to career about the streets, especially when they are all paved with cobbles as they are at Easton Haven, which are{331} so slippery when it’s wet. He slipped, and it went over him in a moment.’ My thanks were few and awkward, for there still hung to the missive a basting thread, and it was as warm as a nestling bird. I bent low--everybody was emotional in those days--kissed the fragrant thing, thrust it into my bosom, and blushed worse than Camille. "What, the Corner House victim? Is that really a fact?" "My dear child, I don't look upon it in that light at all. The child gave our picturesque friend a certain distinction--'My husband is dead, and this is my only child,' and all that sort of thing. It pays in society." leave them on the steps of a foundling asylum in order to insure [See larger version] Interoffice guff says you're planning definite moves on your own, J. O., and against some opposition. Is the Colonel so poor or so grasping—or what? Albert could not speak, for he felt as if his brains and teeth were rattling about inside his head. The rest of[Pg 188] the family hunched together by the door, the boys gaping idiotically, the girls in tears. "Now you're married." The host was called in, and unlocked a drawer in which they were deposited. The galleyman, with visible reluctance, arrayed himself in the garments, and he was observed to shudder more than once during the investiture of the dead man's apparel. HoME香京julia种子在线播放 ENTER NUMBET 0016hnmzx.com.cn
      kok88.net.cn
      www.ffoier.com.cn
      kedouwen.com.cn
      www.nu1.com.cn
      www.trenso.com.cn
      www.shibotiyu.com.cn
      www.tonger.net.cn
      www.suidaolu.com.cn
      mj5ryf.com.cn
      处女被大鸡巴操 强奸乱伦小说图片 俄罗斯美女爱爱图 调教强奸学生 亚洲女的穴 夜来香图片大全 美女性强奸电影 手机版色中阁 男性人体艺术素描图 16p成人 欧美性爱360 电影区 亚洲电影 欧美电影 经典三级 偷拍自拍 动漫电影 乱伦电影 变态另类 全部电 类似狠狠鲁的网站 黑吊操白逼图片 韩国黄片种子下载 操逼逼逼逼逼 人妻 小说 p 偷拍10幼女自慰 极品淫水很多 黄色做i爱 日本女人人体电影快播看 大福国小 我爱肏屄美女 mmcrwcom 欧美多人性交图片 肥臀乱伦老头舔阴帝 d09a4343000019c5 西欧人体艺术b xxoo激情短片 未成年人的 插泰国人夭图片 第770弾み1 24p 日本美女性 交动态 eee色播 yantasythunder 操无毛少女屄 亚洲图片你懂的女人 鸡巴插姨娘 特级黄 色大片播 左耳影音先锋 冢本友希全集 日本人体艺术绿色 我爱被舔逼 内射 幼 美阴图 喷水妹子高潮迭起 和后妈 操逼 美女吞鸡巴 鸭个自慰 中国女裸名单 操逼肥臀出水换妻 色站裸体义术 中国行上的漏毛美女叫什么 亚洲妹性交图 欧美美女人裸体人艺照 成人色妹妹直播 WWW_JXCT_COM r日本女人性淫乱 大胆人艺体艺图片 女同接吻av 碰碰哥免费自拍打炮 艳舞写真duppid1 88电影街拍视频 日本自拍做爱qvod 实拍美女性爱组图 少女高清av 浙江真实乱伦迅雷 台湾luanlunxiaoshuo 洛克王国宠物排行榜 皇瑟电影yy频道大全 红孩儿连连看 阴毛摄影 大胆美女写真人体艺术摄影 和风骚三个媳妇在家做爱 性爱办公室高清 18p2p木耳 大波撸影音 大鸡巴插嫩穴小说 一剧不超两个黑人 阿姨诱惑我快播 幼香阁千叶县小学生 少女妇女被狗强奸 曰人体妹妹 十二岁性感幼女 超级乱伦qvod 97爱蜜桃ccc336 日本淫妇阴液 av海量资源999 凤凰影视成仁 辰溪四中艳照门照片 先锋模特裸体展示影片 成人片免费看 自拍百度云 肥白老妇女 女爱人体图片 妈妈一女穴 星野美夏 日本少女dachidu 妹子私处人体图片 yinmindahuitang 舔无毛逼影片快播 田莹疑的裸体照片 三级电影影音先锋02222 妻子被外国老头操 观月雏乃泥鳅 韩国成人偷拍自拍图片 强奸5一9岁幼女小说 汤姆影院av图片 妹妹人艺体图 美女大驱 和女友做爱图片自拍p 绫川まどか在线先锋 那么嫩的逼很少见了 小女孩做爱 处女好逼连连看图图 性感美女在家做爱 近距离抽插骚逼逼 黑屌肏金毛屄 日韩av美少女 看喝尿尿小姐日逼色色色网图片 欧美肛交新视频 美女吃逼逼 av30线上免费 伊人在线三级经典 新视觉影院t6090影院 最新淫色电影网址 天龙影院远古手机版 搞老太影院 插进美女的大屁股里 私人影院加盟费用 www258dd 求一部电影里面有一个二猛哥 深肛交 日本萌妹子人体艺术写真图片 插入屄眼 美女的木奶 中文字幕黄色网址影视先锋 九号女神裸 和骚人妻偷情 和潘晓婷做爱 国模大尺度蜜桃 欧美大逼50p 西西人体成人 李宗瑞继母做爱原图物处理 nianhuawang 男鸡巴的视屏 � 97免费色伦电影 好色网成人 大姨子先锋 淫荡巨乳美女教师妈妈 性nuexiaoshuo WWW36YYYCOM 长春继续给力进屋就操小女儿套干破内射对白淫荡 农夫激情社区 日韩无码bt 欧美美女手掰嫩穴图片 日本援交偷拍自拍 入侵者日本在线播放 亚洲白虎偷拍自拍 常州高见泽日屄 寂寞少妇自卫视频 人体露逼图片 多毛外国老太 变态乱轮手机在线 淫荡妈妈和儿子操逼 伦理片大奶少女 看片神器最新登入地址sqvheqi345com账号群 麻美学姐无头 圣诞老人射小妞和强奸小妞动话片 亚洲AV女老师 先锋影音欧美成人资源 33344iucoom zV天堂电影网 宾馆美女打炮视频 色五月丁香五月magnet 嫂子淫乱小说 张歆艺的老公 吃奶男人视频在线播放 欧美色图男女乱伦 avtt2014ccvom 性插色欲香影院 青青草撸死你青青草 99热久久第一时间 激情套图卡通动漫 幼女裸聊做爱口交 日本女人被强奸乱伦 草榴社区快播 2kkk正在播放兽骑 啊不要人家小穴都湿了 www猎奇影视 A片www245vvcomwwwchnrwhmhzcn 搜索宜春院av wwwsee78co 逼奶鸡巴插 好吊日AV在线视频19gancom 熟女伦乱图片小说 日本免费av无码片在线开苞 鲁大妈撸到爆 裸聊官网 德国熟女xxx 新不夜城论坛首页手机 女虐男网址 男女做爱视频华为网盘 激情午夜天亚洲色图 内裤哥mangent 吉沢明歩制服丝袜WWWHHH710COM 屌逼在线试看 人体艺体阿娇艳照 推荐一个可以免费看片的网站如果被QQ拦截请复制链接在其它浏览器打开xxxyyy5comintr2a2cb551573a2b2e 欧美360精品粉红鲍鱼 教师调教第一页 聚美屋精品图 中韩淫乱群交 俄罗斯撸撸片 把鸡巴插进小姨子的阴道 干干AV成人网 aolasoohpnbcn www84ytom 高清大量潮喷www27dyycom 宝贝开心成人 freefronvideos人母 嫩穴成人网gggg29com 逼着舅妈给我口交肛交彩漫画 欧美色色aV88wwwgangguanscom 老太太操逼自拍视频 777亚洲手机在线播放 有没有夫妻3p小说 色列漫画淫女 午间色站导航 欧美成人处女色大图 童颜巨乳亚洲综合 桃色性欲草 色眯眯射逼 无码中文字幕塞外青楼这是一个 狂日美女老师人妻 爱碰网官网 亚洲图片雅蠛蝶 快播35怎么搜片 2000XXXX电影 新谷露性家庭影院 深深候dvd播放 幼齿用英语怎么说 不雅伦理无需播放器 国外淫荡图片 国外网站幼幼嫩网址 成年人就去色色视频快播 我鲁日日鲁老老老我爱 caoshaonvbi 人体艺术avav 性感性色导航 韩国黄色哥来嫖网站 成人网站美逼 淫荡熟妇自拍 欧美色惰图片 北京空姐透明照 狼堡免费av视频 www776eom 亚洲无码av欧美天堂网男人天堂 欧美激情爆操 a片kk266co 色尼姑成人极速在线视频 国语家庭系列 蒋雯雯 越南伦理 色CC伦理影院手机版 99jbbcom 大鸡巴舅妈 国产偷拍自拍淫荡对话视频 少妇春梦射精 开心激动网 自拍偷牌成人 色桃隐 撸狗网性交视频 淫荡的三位老师 伦理电影wwwqiuxia6commqiuxia6com 怡春院分站 丝袜超短裙露脸迅雷下载 色制服电影院 97超碰好吊色男人 yy6080理论在线宅男日韩福利大全 大嫂丝袜 500人群交手机在线 5sav 偷拍熟女吧 口述我和妹妹的欲望 50p电脑版 wwwavtttcon 3p3com 伦理无码片在线看 欧美成人电影图片岛国性爱伦理电影 先锋影音AV成人欧美 我爱好色 淫电影网 WWW19MMCOM 玛丽罗斯3d同人动画h在线看 动漫女孩裸体 超级丝袜美腿乱伦 1919gogo欣赏 大色逼淫色 www就是撸 激情文学网好骚 A级黄片免费 xedd5com 国内的b是黑的 快播美国成年人片黄 av高跟丝袜视频 上原保奈美巨乳女教师在线观看 校园春色都市激情fefegancom 偷窥自拍XXOO 搜索看马操美女 人本女优视频 日日吧淫淫 人妻巨乳影院 美国女子性爱学校 大肥屁股重口味 啪啪啪啊啊啊不要 操碰 japanfreevideoshome国产 亚州淫荡老熟女人体 伦奸毛片免费在线看 天天影视se 樱桃做爱视频 亚卅av在线视频 x奸小说下载 亚洲色图图片在线 217av天堂网 东方在线撸撸-百度 幼幼丝袜集 灰姑娘的姐姐 青青草在线视频观看对华 86papa路con 亚洲1AV 综合图片2区亚洲 美国美女大逼电影 010插插av成人网站 www色comwww821kxwcom 播乐子成人网免费视频在线观看 大炮撸在线影院 ,www4KkKcom 野花鲁最近30部 wwwCC213wapwww2233ww2download 三客优最新地址 母亲让儿子爽的无码视频 全国黄色片子 欧美色图美国十次 超碰在线直播 性感妖娆操 亚洲肉感熟女色图 a片A毛片管看视频 8vaa褋芯屑 333kk 川岛和津实视频 在线母子乱伦对白 妹妹肥逼五月 亚洲美女自拍 老婆在我面前小说 韩国空姐堪比情趣内衣 干小姐综合 淫妻色五月 添骚穴 WM62COM 23456影视播放器 成人午夜剧场 尼姑福利网 AV区亚洲AV欧美AV512qucomwwwc5508com 经典欧美骚妇 震动棒露出 日韩丝袜美臀巨乳在线 av无限吧看 就去干少妇 色艺无间正面是哪集 校园春色我和老师做爱 漫画夜色 天海丽白色吊带 黄色淫荡性虐小说 午夜高清播放器 文20岁女性荫道口图片 热国产热无码热有码 2015小明发布看看算你色 百度云播影视 美女肏屄屄乱轮小说 家族舔阴AV影片 邪恶在线av有码 父女之交 关于处女破处的三级片 极品护士91在线 欧美虐待女人视频的网站 享受老太太的丝袜 aaazhibuo 8dfvodcom成人 真实自拍足交 群交男女猛插逼 妓女爱爱动态 lin35com是什么网站 abp159 亚洲色图偷拍自拍乱伦熟女抠逼自慰 朝国三级篇 淫三国幻想 免费的av小电影网站 日本阿v视频免费按摩师 av750c0m 黄色片操一下 巨乳少女车震在线观看 操逼 免费 囗述情感一乱伦岳母和女婿 WWW_FAMITSU_COM 偷拍中国少妇在公车被操视频 花也真衣论理电影 大鸡鸡插p洞 新片欧美十八岁美少 进击的巨人神thunderftp 西方美女15p 深圳哪里易找到老女人玩视频 在线成人有声小说 365rrr 女尿图片 我和淫荡的小姨做爱 � 做爱技术体照 淫妇性爱 大学生私拍b 第四射狠狠射小说 色中色成人av社区 和小姨子乱伦肛交 wwwppp62com 俄罗斯巨乳人体艺术 骚逼阿娇 汤芳人体图片大胆 大胆人体艺术bb私处 性感大胸骚货 哪个网站幼女的片多 日本美女本子把 色 五月天 婷婷 快播 美女 美穴艺术 色百合电影导航 大鸡巴用力 孙悟空操美少女战士 狠狠撸美女手掰穴图片 古代女子与兽类交 沙耶香套图 激情成人网区 暴风影音av播放 动漫女孩怎么插第3个 mmmpp44 黑木麻衣无码ed2k 淫荡学姐少妇 乱伦操少女屄 高中性爱故事 骚妹妹爱爱图网 韩国模特剪长发 大鸡巴把我逼日了 中国张柏芝做爱片中国张柏芝做爱片中国张柏芝做爱片中国张柏芝做爱片中国张柏芝做爱片 大胆女人下体艺术图片 789sss 影音先锋在线国内情侣野外性事自拍普通话对白 群撸图库 闪现君打阿乐 ady 小说 插入表妹嫩穴小说 推荐成人资源 网络播放器 成人台 149大胆人体艺术 大屌图片 骚美女成人av 春暖花开春色性吧 女亭婷五月 我上了同桌的姐姐 恋夜秀场主播自慰视频 yzppp 屄茎 操屄女图 美女鲍鱼大特写 淫乱的日本人妻山口玲子 偷拍射精图 性感美女人体艺木图片 种马小说完本 免费电影院 骑士福利导航导航网站 骚老婆足交 国产性爱一级电影 欧美免费成人花花性都 欧美大肥妞性爱视频 家庭乱伦网站快播 偷拍自拍国产毛片 金发美女也用大吊来开包 缔D杏那 yentiyishu人体艺术ytys WWWUUKKMCOM 女人露奶 � 苍井空露逼 老荡妇高跟丝袜足交 偷偷和女友的朋友做爱迅雷 做爱七十二尺 朱丹人体合成 麻腾由纪妃 帅哥撸播种子图 鸡巴插逼动态图片 羙国十次啦中文 WWW137AVCOM 神斗片欧美版华语 有气质女人人休艺术 由美老师放屁电影 欧美女人肉肏图片 白虎种子快播 国产自拍90后女孩 美女在床上疯狂嫩b 饭岛爱最后之作 幼幼强奸摸奶 色97成人动漫 两性性爱打鸡巴插逼 新视觉影院4080青苹果影院 嗯好爽插死我了 阴口艺术照 李宗瑞电影qvod38 爆操舅母 亚洲色图七七影院 被大鸡巴操菊花 怡红院肿么了 成人极品影院删除 欧美性爱大图色图强奸乱 欧美女子与狗随便性交 苍井空的bt种子无码 熟女乱伦长篇小说 大色虫 兽交幼女影音先锋播放 44aad be0ca93900121f9b 先锋天耗ばさ无码 欧毛毛女三级黄色片图 干女人黑木耳照 日本美女少妇嫩逼人体艺术 sesechangchang 色屄屄网 久久撸app下载 色图色噜 美女鸡巴大奶 好吊日在线视频在线观看 透明丝袜脚偷拍自拍 中山怡红院菜单 wcwwwcom下载 骑嫂子 亚洲大色妣 成人故事365ahnet 丝袜家庭教mp4 幼交肛交 妹妹撸撸大妈 日本毛爽 caoprom超碰在email 关于中国古代偷窥的黄片 第一会所老熟女下载 wwwhuangsecome 狼人干综合新地址HD播放 变态儿子强奸乱伦图 强奸电影名字 2wwwer37com 日本毛片基地一亚洲AVmzddcxcn 暗黑圣经仙桃影院 37tpcocn 持月真由xfplay 好吊日在线视频三级网 我爱背入李丽珍 电影师傅床戏在线观看 96插妹妹sexsex88com 豪放家庭在线播放 桃花宝典极夜著豆瓜网 安卓系统播放神器 美美网丝袜诱惑 人人干全免费视频xulawyercn av无插件一本道 全国色五月 操逼电影小说网 good在线wwwyuyuelvcom www18avmmd 撸波波影视无插件 伊人幼女成人电影 会看射的图片 小明插看看 全裸美女扒开粉嫩b 国人自拍性交网站 萝莉白丝足交本子 七草ちとせ巨乳视频 摇摇晃晃的成人电影 兰桂坊成社人区小说www68kqcom 舔阴论坛 久撸客一撸客色国内外成人激情在线 明星门 欧美大胆嫩肉穴爽大片 www牛逼插 性吧星云 少妇性奴的屁眼 人体艺术大胆mscbaidu1imgcn 最新久久色色成人版 l女同在线 小泽玛利亚高潮图片搜索 女性裸b图 肛交bt种子 最热门有声小说 人间添春色 春色猜谜字 樱井莉亚钢管舞视频 小泽玛利亚直美6p 能用的h网 还能看的h网 bl动漫h网 开心五月激 东京热401 男色女色第四色酒色网 怎么下载黄色小说 黄色小说小栽 和谐图城 乐乐影院 色哥导航 特色导航 依依社区 爱窝窝在线 色狼谷成人 91porn 包要你射电影 色色3A丝袜 丝袜妹妹淫网 爱色导航(荐) 好男人激情影院 坏哥哥 第七色 色久久 人格分裂 急先锋 撸撸射中文网 第一会所综合社区 91影院老师机 东方成人激情 怼莪影院吹潮 老鸭窝伊人无码不卡无码一本道 av女柳晶电影 91天生爱风流作品 深爱激情小说私房婷婷网 擼奶av 567pao 里番3d一家人野外 上原在线电影 水岛津实透明丝袜 1314酒色 网旧网俺也去 0855影院 在线无码私人影院 搜索 国产自拍 神马dy888午夜伦理达达兔 农民工黄晓婷 日韩裸体黑丝御姐 屈臣氏的燕窝面膜怎么样つぼみ晶エリーの早漏チ○ポ强化合宿 老熟女人性视频 影音先锋 三上悠亚ol 妹妹影院福利片 hhhhhhhhsxo 午夜天堂热的国产 强奸剧场 全裸香蕉视频无码 亚欧伦理视频 秋霞为什么给封了 日本在线视频空天使 日韩成人aⅴ在线 日本日屌日屄导航视频 在线福利视频 日本推油无码av magnet 在线免费视频 樱井梨吮东 日本一本道在线无码DVD 日本性感诱惑美女做爱阴道流水视频 日本一级av 汤姆avtom在线视频 台湾佬中文娱乐线20 阿v播播下载 橙色影院 奴隶少女护士cg视频 汤姆在线影院无码 偷拍宾馆 业面紧急生级访问 色和尚有线 厕所偷拍一族 av女l 公交色狼优酷视频 裸体视频AV 人与兽肉肉网 董美香ol 花井美纱链接 magnet 西瓜影音 亚洲 自拍 日韩女优欧美激情偷拍自拍 亚洲成年人免费视频 荷兰免费成人电影 深喉呕吐XXⅩX 操石榴在线视频 天天色成人免费视频 314hu四虎 涩久免费视频在线观看 成人电影迅雷下载 能看见整个奶子的香蕉影院 水菜丽百度影音 gwaz079百度云 噜死你们资源站 主播走光视频合集迅雷下载 thumbzilla jappen 精品Av 古川伊织star598在线 假面女皇vip在线视频播放 国产自拍迷情校园 啪啪啪公寓漫画 日本阿AV 黄色手机电影 欧美在线Av影院 华裔电击女神91在线 亚洲欧美专区 1日本1000部免费视频 开放90后 波多野结衣 东方 影院av 页面升级紧急访问每天正常更新 4438Xchengeren 老炮色 a k福利电影 色欲影视色天天视频 高老庄aV 259LUXU-683 magnet 手机在线电影 国产区 欧美激情人人操网 国产 偷拍 直播 日韩 国内外激情在线视频网给 站长统计一本道人妻 光棍影院被封 紫竹铃取汁 ftp 狂插空姐嫩 xfplay 丈夫面前 穿靴子伪街 XXOO视频在线免费 大香蕉道久在线播放 电棒漏电嗨过头 充气娃能看下毛和洞吗 夫妻牲交 福利云点墦 yukun瑟妃 疯狂交换女友 国产自拍26页 腐女资源 百度云 日本DVD高清无码视频 偷拍,自拍AV伦理电影 A片小视频福利站。 大奶肥婆自拍偷拍图片 交配伊甸园 超碰在线视频自拍偷拍国产 小热巴91大神 rctd 045 类似于A片 超美大奶大学生美女直播被男友操 男友问 你的衣服怎么脱掉的 亚洲女与黑人群交视频一 在线黄涩 木内美保步兵番号 鸡巴插入欧美美女的b舒服 激情在线国产自拍日韩欧美 国语福利小视频在线观看 作爱小视颍 潮喷合集丝袜无码mp4 做爱的无码高清视频 牛牛精品 伊aⅤ在线观看 savk12 哥哥搞在线播放 在线电一本道影 一级谍片 250pp亚洲情艺中心,88 欧美一本道九色在线一 wwwseavbacom色av吧 cos美女在线 欧美17,18ⅹⅹⅹ视频 自拍嫩逼 小电影在线观看网站 筱田优 贼 水电工 5358x视频 日本69式视频有码 b雪福利导航 韩国女主播19tvclub在线 操逼清晰视频 丝袜美女国产视频网址导航 水菜丽颜射房间 台湾妹中文娱乐网 风吟岛视频 口交 伦理 日本熟妇色五十路免费视频 A级片互舔 川村真矢Av在线观看 亚洲日韩av 色和尚国产自拍 sea8 mp4 aV天堂2018手机在线 免费版国产偷拍a在线播放 狠狠 婷婷 丁香 小视频福利在线观看平台 思妍白衣小仙女被邻居强上 萝莉自拍有水 4484新视觉 永久发布页 977成人影视在线观看 小清新影院在线观 小鸟酱后丝后入百度云 旋风魅影四级 香蕉影院小黄片免费看 性爱直播磁力链接 小骚逼第一色影院 性交流的视频 小雪小视频bd 小视频TV禁看视频 迷奸AV在线看 nba直播 任你在干线 汤姆影院在线视频国产 624u在线播放 成人 一级a做爰片就在线看狐狸视频 小香蕉AV视频 www182、com 腿模简小育 学生做爱视频 秘密搜查官 快播 成人福利网午夜 一级黄色夫妻录像片 直接看的gav久久播放器 国产自拍400首页 sm老爹影院 谁知道隔壁老王网址在线 综合网 123西瓜影音 米奇丁香 人人澡人人漠大学生 色久悠 夜色视频你今天寂寞了吗? 菲菲影视城美国 被抄的影院 变态另类 欧美 成人 国产偷拍自拍在线小说 不用下载安装就能看的吃男人鸡巴视频 插屄视频 大贯杏里播放 wwwhhh50 233若菜奈央 伦理片天海翼秘密搜查官 大香蕉在线万色屋视频 那种漫画小说你懂的 祥仔电影合集一区 那里可以看澳门皇冠酒店a片 色自啪 亚洲aV电影天堂 谷露影院ar toupaizaixian sexbj。com 毕业生 zaixian mianfei 朝桐光视频 成人短视频在线直接观看 陈美霖 沈阳音乐学院 导航女 www26yjjcom 1大尺度视频 开平虐女视频 菅野雪松协和影视在线视频 华人play在线视频bbb 鸡吧操屄视频 多啪啪免费视频 悠草影院 金兰策划网 (969) 橘佑金短视频 国内一极刺激自拍片 日本制服番号大全magnet 成人动漫母系 电脑怎么清理内存 黄色福利1000 dy88午夜 偷拍中学生洗澡磁力链接 花椒相机福利美女视频 站长推荐磁力下载 mp4 三洞轮流插视频 玉兔miki热舞视频 夜生活小视频 爆乳人妖小视频 国内网红主播自拍福利迅雷下载 不用app的裸裸体美女操逼视频 变态SM影片在线观看 草溜影院元气吧 - 百度 - 百度 波推全套视频 国产双飞集合ftp 日本在线AV网 笔国毛片 神马影院女主播是我的邻居 影音资源 激情乱伦电影 799pao 亚洲第一色第一影院 av视频大香蕉 老梁故事汇希斯莱杰 水中人体磁力链接 下载 大香蕉黄片免费看 济南谭崔 避开屏蔽的岛a片 草破福利 要看大鸡巴操小骚逼的人的视频 黑丝少妇影音先锋 欧美巨乳熟女磁力链接 美国黄网站色大全 伦蕉在线久播 极品女厕沟 激情五月bd韩国电影 混血美女自摸和男友激情啪啪自拍诱人呻吟福利视频 人人摸人人妻做人人看 44kknn 娸娸原网 伊人欧美 恋夜影院视频列表安卓青青 57k影院 如果电话亭 avi 插爆骚女精品自拍 青青草在线免费视频1769TV 令人惹火的邻家美眉 影音先锋 真人妹子被捅动态图 男人女人做完爱视频15 表姐合租两人共处一室晚上她竟爬上了我的床 性爱教学视频 北条麻妃bd在线播放版 国产老师和师生 magnet wwwcctv1024 女神自慰 ftp 女同性恋做激情视频 欧美大胆露阴视频 欧美无码影视 好女色在线观看 后入肥臀18p 百度影视屏福利 厕所超碰视频 强奸mp magnet 欧美妹aⅴ免费线上看 2016年妞干网视频 5手机在线福利 超在线最视频 800av:cOm magnet 欧美性爱免播放器在线播放 91大款肥汤的性感美乳90后邻家美眉趴着窗台后入啪啪 秋霞日本毛片网站 cheng ren 在线视频 上原亚衣肛门无码解禁影音先锋 美脚家庭教师在线播放 尤酷伦理片 熟女性生活视频在线观看 欧美av在线播放喷潮 194avav 凤凰AV成人 - 百度 kbb9999 AV片AV在线AV无码 爱爱视频高清免费观看 黄色男女操b视频 观看 18AV清纯视频在线播放平台 成人性爱视频久久操 女性真人生殖系统双性人视频 下身插入b射精视频 明星潜规测视频 mp4 免賛a片直播绪 国内 自己 偷拍 在线 国内真实偷拍 手机在线 国产主播户外勾在线 三桥杏奈高清无码迅雷下载 2五福电影院凸凹频频 男主拿鱼打女主,高宝宝 色哥午夜影院 川村まや痴汉 草溜影院费全过程免费 淫小弟影院在线视频 laohantuiche 啪啪啪喷潮XXOO视频 青娱乐成人国产 蓝沢润 一本道 亚洲青涩中文欧美 神马影院线理论 米娅卡莉法的av 在线福利65535 欧美粉色在线 欧美性受群交视频1在线播放 极品喷奶熟妇在线播放 变态另类无码福利影院92 天津小姐被偷拍 磁力下载 台湾三级电髟全部 丝袜美腿偷拍自拍 偷拍女生性行为图 妻子的乱伦 白虎少妇 肏婶骚屄 外国大妈会阴照片 美少女操屄图片 妹妹自慰11p 操老熟女的b 361美女人体 360电影院樱桃 爱色妹妹亚洲色图 性交卖淫姿势高清图片一级 欧美一黑对二白 大色网无毛一线天 射小妹网站 寂寞穴 西西人体模特苍井空 操的大白逼吧 骚穴让我操 拉好友干女朋友3p