| Literature DB >> 30558529 |
A C Harvey1, O T Skilbrei2, F Besnier2, M F Solberg2, A-G E Sørvik2, K A Glover2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mature male parr (MMP) represent an important alternative life-history strategy in Atlantic salmon populations. Previous studies indicate that the maturation size threshold for male parr varies among wild populations and is influenced by individual growth, environmental conditions, and genetics. More than ten generations of breeding have resulted in domesticated salmon displaying many genetic differences to wild salmon, including greatly increased growth rates. This may have resulted in domesticated fish with the potential to outgrow the size threshold for early maturation, or evolution of the size threshold of the trait itself. To investigate this, we performed a common-garden experiment under farming conditions using 4680 salmon from 39 families representing four wild, two wild-domesticated hybrid, and two domesticated strains.Entities:
Keywords: Fitness; Growth; Hybridisation; Precocious males; Salmon
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30558529 PMCID: PMC6298023 DOI: 10.1186/s12862-018-1294-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Fig. 1Map of Norway indicating the rivers of origin of the wild strains
Sex-specific and pooled growth data for each strain
| Females | Immature male parr | Mature male parr (MMP) | Pooled | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | W (g) | L (cm) | CF | n | W (g) | L (cm) | CF | n | W (g) | L (cm) | CF | n | W (g) | L (cm) | CF | |
| (± SE) | (± SE) | (± SE) | (± SE) | |||||||||||||
| Arna | 132 | 37.31 | 14.40 | 1.10 | 69 | 39.96 | 14.79 | 1.11 | 51 | 15.59 | 11.05 | 1.10 | 252 | 33.44 | 13.82 | 1.10 |
| Driva | 85 | 18.61 | 11.42 | 1.01 | 40 | 12.38 | 9.90 | 1.00 | 51 | 10.65 | 9.99 | 1.03 | 176 | 14.89 | 10.66 | 1.01 |
| Figgjo | 132 | 14.14 | 10.35 | 1.04 | 72 | 13.79 | 10.13 | 1.04 | 73 | 11.90 | 10.16 | 1.09 | 277 | 13.46 | 10.24 | 1.05 |
| Hybrid 1 | 144 | 35.17 | 14.16 | 1.10 | 93 | 36.34 | 14.39 | 1.09 | 32 | 22.34 | 12.16 | 1.13 | 269 | 34.05 | 14.00 | 1.10 |
| Dom 1 | 131 | 66.76 | 17.76 | 1.12 | 122 | 69.30 | 18.08 | 1.12 | 18 | 22.33 | 12.13 | 1.15 | 271 | 64.95 | 17.53 | 1.12 |
| Vosso | 121 | 35.45 | 14.38 | 1.07 | 32 | 27.22 | 12.51 | 1.05 | 93 | 16.74 | 11.19 | 1.09 | 246 | 27.30 | 12.93 | 1.08 |
| Hybrid 2 | 129 | 45.88 | 15.33 | 1.13 | 100 | 47.13 | 15.75 | 1.12 | 24 | 19.58 | 11.73 | 1.15 | 252 | 43.75 | 15.16 | 1.12 |
| Dom 2 | 119 | 64.74 | 17.71 | 1.12 | 120 | 69.08 | 18.06 | 1.15 | 6 | 22.17 | 12.28 | 1.14 | 245 | 65.82 | 17.75 | 1.14 |
N; number of fish, W (g); average weight in grams, L (cm); average length in cm, CF; condition factor, SE; standard error. Pooled: all fish from the representative sampling (1988 in total). Dom; domestic
Fig. 2Weight frequency distributions for: all strains (a), wild (b), hybrid (c), and domestic strains (d). The vertical stippled line indicates the predicted average size threshold between the lower and upper mode for the wild (19 g), hybrid (26 g) and domesticated (26 g) strains in these data. Note scaling differences on Y-axis
Output of the final model for the LME investigating growth of MMP among strains
| N | Response | Random | effects | Fixed | effects | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | Variable | Chi.sq | Chi.df | Variable | Sum Sq | Mean Sq | Num Df | Den Df | F value | P value | ||
| 654 | Log Weight | Tank | 5.77 | 1 | 0.0163 | Strain | 15.27 | 2.18 | 7 | 18.98 | 4.06 | 0.007 |
| Sire | 7.25 | 1 | 0.0071 | |||||||||
| Dam | 12.68 | 1 | 0.0004 | |||||||||
N; number of fish. Log weight; log10 (wet weight) at termination. Chi.sq.; the value of the Chi square statistics. Chi Df; the degrees of freedom for the test. P value; P-value of the likelihood ratio test for the random effect. Sum.Sq; sum of squares. Num Df, numerator degrees of freedom. Den Df; denominator degrees of freedom based on Sattherwaithe’s approximations. F; F-value
P values of the Tukey adjusted multiple comparisons of the weight of all MMPs among the strains. Significant p values are in bold
| Arna | Driva | Figgjo | Hybrid 1 | Dom 1 | Vosso | Hybrid 2 | Dom 2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arna | – | |||||||
| Driva | 0.84 | – | ||||||
| Figgjo | 0.63 | 1.00 | – | |||||
| Hybrid 1 | 0.98 | 0.43 | 0.11 | – | ||||
| Dom 1 | 0.08 |
|
| 0.29 | – | |||
| Vosso | 1.00 | 0.84 | 0.62 | 0.98 | 0.07 | – | ||
| Hybrid 2 | 1.00 | 0.81 | 0.59 | 1.00 | 0.12 | 1.00 | – | |
| Dom 2 | 0.63 | 0.13 |
| 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.60 | 0.45 | – |
Fig. 3Percentage mature male parr (MMP) versus average weight per family (a-c) and per strain average (d). The open symbols represent family averages while the filled symbols represent strain averages. Strains are grouped in the figures per those that share half siblings in a (Figgjo strain, Hybrid 1 and Domestic 1) and b (Vosso strain, Hybrid 2 and Domestic 2), while the Arna and Driva strains are grouped to conserve space in c. Average family weight per strain for each of the three sex categories
Model selection for the fixed effects of the GLMM investigating incidence of mature male parr (MMP) in (A) the lower size mode and (B) the upper size mode
| Fixed | Random | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Response | Strain | Weight | Weight^2 | S x W | Dam | Sire | Tank | AIC | ΔAIC |
| A | ||||||||||
| 1 | Sex | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | 456.58 | 8.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 3 | x | x | x | x | x | 470.21 | 21.78 | |||
| 4 | x | x | x | x | x | 482.05 | 33.62 | |||
| 5 | x | x | x | x | x | 463.33 | 14.9 | |||
| 6 | x | x | x | x | 556.52 | 108.09 | ||||
| B | ||||||||||
| 1 | Sex | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | 229.71 | 10.39 |
| 2 | x | x | x | x | x | x | 227.14 | 7.82 | ||
| 3 | x | x | x | x | x | 225.15 | 5.83 | |||
| 4 | x | x | x | x | x | 225.53 | 6.21 | |||
| 5 | x | x | x | x | x | 221.28 | 1.96 | |||
| 6 | x | 321.27 | 101.95 | |||||||
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
AIC; Akaike information criterion. ΔAIC; difference in AIC value between the model and the final model. S x W; strain x average female family weight interaction. The final fixed effect structure is shown in bold
P values of the Tukey adjusted multiple comparisons of the incidence of mature male parr (MMP) in the lower size mode between the strains. Significant p values are in bold
| Arna | Driva | Figgjo | Hybrid 1 | Dom 1 | Vosso | Hybrid 2 | Dom 2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arna | – | |||||||
| Driva | 0.96 | – | ||||||
| Figgjo | 1.00 | 0.93 | – | |||||
| Hybrid 1 | 0.07 |
|
| – | ||||
| Dom 1 | 0.99 | 0.78 | 0.99 | 0.77 | – | |||
| Vosso | 0.48 | 0.98 | 0.34 |
| 0.31 | – | ||
| Hybrid 2 | 0.58 | 0.09 | 0.42 | 0.99 | 0.99 |
| – | |
| Dom 2 | 0.97 | 0.74 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.37 | 1.00 | – |
Fig. 4The predicted probability of maturing as a male parr over the individual logged weight range of the lower size mode for each strain and the upper size mode overall