| Literature DB >> 18275608 |
Christian Michel1, Brendan J Hicks, Kai N Stölting, Andrew C Clarke, Mark I Stevens, Ray Tana, Axel Meyer, Michael R van den Heuvel.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many postglacial lakes contain fish species with distinct ecomorphs. Similar evolutionary scenarios might be acting on evolutionarily young fish communities in lakes of remote islands. One process that drives diversification in island freshwater fish species is the colonization of depauperate freshwater environments by diadromous (migratory) taxa, which secondarily lose their migratory behaviour. The loss of migration limits dispersal and gene flow between distant populations, and, therefore, is expected to facilitate local morphological and genetic differentiation. To date, most studies have focused on interspecific relationships among migratory species and their non-migratory sister taxa. We hypothesize that the loss of migration facilitates intraspecific morphological, behavioural, and genetic differentiation between migratory and non-migratory populations of facultatively diadromous taxa, and, hence, incipient speciation of island freshwater fish species.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18275608 PMCID: PMC2270262 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-8-49
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Figure 1Study area and sample locations for . A: Lateral view on the head of a male Gobiomorphus cotidianus (© Angus McIntosh, Natural Sciences Image Library, New Zealand). B: Location of the study area in New Zealand (green square) and location of Lake Taupo (blue dot). C: Study area with sample locations (black) for G. cotidianus and geographic locations (grey/italic) as mentioned in the text.
Sample details and descriptive parameters for meristic, otolith, reproduction and genetic analyses.
| Site | Meristics | Otoliths | Reproduction | Genetic analyses (AFLPs) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| %ND | %S | Stat. | %P | ||||||
| LT | 30 | 6 | 100% | 9 | 100% | A | 19 | 62% | 105 |
| UT | 16 | 14 | 100% | 46 | 87% | A | 14 | 52% | 96 |
| DT | 29 | 18 | 33% | 18 | 6% | B | 13 | 64% | 118 |
| RR | 18 | 11 | 27% | 17 | 0% | B | 4 | 43% | 94 |
| KR | 19 | 11 | 100% | 14 | 64% | A | 5 | 33% | 73 |
LT = Lake Tarawera, UT = upstream Tarawera, DT = downstream Tarawera, RR = Rangitaiki River, KR = Kaituna River. NM = Samples included in meristic analyses, NO = Samples included in otolith analyses, %ND = Percentage of non-diadromous fish, NR = Female samples included in reproduction-type comparisons, %S = Percentage of summer spawning females, Stat. = Significant differences (P < 0.05) in spawning type composition, shared letters indicate no significant difference at P < 0.05. NG = Samples included in genetic analyses, %P = Percentage polymorphic fragments (from 732 total fragments), HSW = Shannon-Wiener Diversity index.
Figure 2Schematic dorsal view of the oculoscapular canal section of the defined canal morphotypes. The canal structures are evident by presence of pores at their extremities. Median pores (M), lateral pores (La = anterior, Lp = posterior lateral pore) and primary neuromasts (pn). Scale bar = 10 mm.
Morphotypes in each sample site.
| Site | Type 1 | Type 2 | Type 3 | Stat. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LT | 30 | 7% | 33% | 60% | A |
| UT | 16 | 0% | 81% | 19% | AB |
| DT | 29 | 83% | 13% | 3% | C |
| RR | 18 | 67% | 33% | 0% | C |
| KR | 19 | 39% | 61% | 0% | BC |
LT = Lake Tarawera, UT = upstream Tarawera, DT = downstream Tarawera, RR = Rangitaiki River, KR = Kaituna River. NM = Number of individuals per sample site included in meristic analyses. Type 1, 2 and 3 = proportion of the respective morphotype (Figure 2) in sample site. Stat. = Significant differences in morphotype compositions between sample sites, shared letters indicate no significant difference at P < 0.05.
Figure 3Typical patterns of . A: non-diadromous profile (category A) in a female Gobiomorphus cotidianus (92 mm) from the Kaituna River. B: diadromous profile (category B) in a male G. cotidianus (96 mm) from the downstream Tarawera River.
Figure 4Nucleus counts against range of normalised . Colours refer to migratory types: blue = non-diadromous, green = diadromous. Black solid symbols were not confidently attributable to either category based on nucleus vs range counts.
Genetic differentiation (FST and θB) between sample sites.
| LT | UT | DT | RR | KR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LT | 0.04* | 0.19* | 0.11* | 0.10* | |
| UT | 0.05** | 0.12* | 0.11* | 0.14* | |
| DT | 0.20** | 0.13** | 0.01ns | 0.10* | |
| RR | 0.13** | 0.12** | 0.02ns | 0.02ns | |
| KR | 0.13** | 0.17** | 0.15** | 0.05ns |
LT = Lake Tarawera, UT = upstream Tarawera, DT = downstream Tarawera, RR = Rangitaiki River, KR = Kaituna River. Below diagonal FST, above diagonal θB, significantly distinct at *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ns = no significant difference.
Figure 5Analyses of genetic structure among sample locations as inferred from AFLP fingerprints. A: Population dendrogram. Numbers on branches are percent bootstrap values out of 1,000,000 pseudo-replicates: Pie diagrams at branch ends illustrate mean proportions of inferred genotypes in the respective sample sites. B: Detailed STRUCTURE bar plot illustrating genotypic composition. Colours are inferred green (light shading) and blue (dark shading) genotypes. X-axis: each vertical bar represents one individual. Y-axis: proportion of genotypes. Labels refer to sample sites as given in A.
Figure 6Summarized comparison of otolith, meristic, reproductive and genetic analyses. Sample locations are indicated above figure, with each characterized by four vertically arranged bar plots. Horizontal arrangements: Migratory type: light green = diadromous, dark blue = non-diadromous. Spawning type: light green = winter spawner, dark blue = summer spawner. Genotype: mean proportions of respective genotype (light green and dark blue) in population, colours refer to genotype as inferred by STRUCTURE (see also Figure 5). Morphotype: green (light) = Type 1, orange = Type 2, blue (dark) = Type 3.