Literature DB >> 28211057

Reproductive energy expenditure and changes in body morphology for a population of Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha with a long distance migration.

T E Bowerman1, A Pinson-Dumm1, C A Peery2, C C Caudill1.   

Abstract

Energetic demands of a long freshwater migration, extended holding period, gamete development and spawning were evaluated for a population of stream-type Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha. Female and male somatic mass decreased by 24 and 21%, respectively, during migration and by an additional 18 and 12% during holding. Between freshwater entry and death after spawning, females allocated 14% of initial somatic energy towards gonad development and 78% for metabolism (46, 25 and 7% during migration, holding and spawning, respectively). Males used only 2% of initial somatic energy for gonad development and 80% on metabolic costs, as well as an increase in snout length (41, 28 and 11% during migration, holding and spawning, respectively). Individually marked O. tshawytscha took between 27 and 53 days to migrate 920 km. Those with slower travel times through the dammed section of the migration corridor arrived at spawning grounds with less muscle energy than faster migrants. Although energy depletion did not appear to be the proximate cause of death in most pre-spawn mortalities, average final post-spawning somatic energy densities were low at 3·6 kJ g-1 in females and 4·1 kJ g-1 in males, consistent with the concept of a minimum energy threshold required to sustain life in semelparous salmonids.
© 2017 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles.

Entities:  

Keywords:  energy threshold; holding; migration; pre-spawning mortality; proximate analysis; spawning

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28211057     DOI: 10.1111/jfb.13274

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Fish Biol        ISSN: 0022-1112            Impact factor:   2.051


  7 in total

1.  Quantification of thermal impacts across freshwater life stages to improve temperature management for anadromous salmonids.

Authors:  Alyssa M FitzGerald; Benjamin T Martin
Journal:  Conserv Physiol       Date:  2022-04-03       Impact factor: 3.252

2.  Assessing contributions of cold-water refuges to reproductive migration corridor conditions for adult Chinook Salmon and steelhead trout in the Columbia River, USA.

Authors:  Marcía N Snyder; Nathan H Schumaker; Jason B Dunham; Matthew L Keefer; Peter Leinenbach; Allen Brookes; John Palmer; Jennifer Wu; Druscilla Keenan; Joseph L Ebersole
Journal:  J Ecohydraul       Date:  2020-12-17

3.  Individual Based Modelling of Fish Migration in a 2-D River System: Model Description and Case Study.

Authors:  Marcía N Snyder; Nathan H Schumaker; Joseph L Ebersole; Jason Dunham; Randy Comeleo; Matthew Keefer; Peter Leinenbach; Allen Brookes; Ben Cope; Jennifer Wu; John Palmer; Druscilla Keenan
Journal:  Landsc Ecol       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 3.848

4.  Environmental change effects on life-history traits and population dynamics of anadromous fishes.

Authors:  P Catalina Chaparro-Pedraza; André M de Roos
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 5.091

5.  Influence of environmental conditions at spawning sites and migration routes on adaptive variation and population connectivity in Chinook salmon.

Authors:  Yara A Alshwairikh; Shayla L Kroeze; Jenny Olsson; Steve A Stephens-Cardenas; William L Swain; Lisette P Waits; Rebekah L Horn; Shawn R Narum; Travis Seaborn
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 2.912

6.  Field assessments of heart rate dynamics during spawning migration of wild and hatchery-reared Chinook salmon.

Authors:  W M Twardek; A Ekström; E J Eliason; R J Lennox; E Tuononen; A E I Abrams; A L Jeanson; S J Cooke
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 6.671

7.  A bioenergetics evaluation of temperature-dependent selection for the spawning phenology by Snake River fall Chinook salmon.

Authors:  John M Plumb
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 2.912

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.