| Literature DB >> 32541850 |
Xinjun Chen1,2,3,4,5,6, Fei Han1, Kai Zhu1, André E Punt7, Dongming Lin8,9,10,11,12.
Abstract
Reproductive investment generally involves a trade-off between somatic growth and energy allocation for reproduction. Previous studies have inferred that jumbo squid Dosidicus gigas support growth during maturation through continuous feeding (an "income" source). However, our recent work suggests possible remobilization of soma during maturation (a "capital" source). We used fatty acids as biochemical indicators to investigate energy acquisition and allocation to reproduction for female D. gigas. We compared the fatty acid profiles of the ovary to those of the mantle muscle (slow turnover rate tissue, representing an energy reserve) and the digestive gland (fast turnover rate organ, reflecting recent consumption). For each tissue, the overall fatty acids among maturity stages overlapped and were similar. The changes with maturation in fatty acid composition in the ovary consistently resembled those of the digestive gland, with the similarity of fatty acids in the mantle muscle and the ovary increasing during maturation, indicating some energy reserves were utilized. Additionally, squid maintained body condition during maturation regardless of increasing investment in reproduction and a decline in feeding intensity. Cumulatively, D. gigas adopt a mixed income-capital breeding strategy in that energy for reproduction is mainly derived from direct food intake, but there is limited somatic reserve remobilization.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32541850 PMCID: PMC7295804 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-66703-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Fatty acid composition in the ovary, the mantle muscle and the digestive gland of female Dosidicus gigas.
| Fatty acid | Ovary | Mantle | Digestive gland |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14:0 | 1.90 ± 1.79 | 0.77 ± 0.10 | 4.49 ± 1.42 |
| 15:0 | 0.47 ± 0.29 | 0.49 ± 0.09 | 1.02 ± 0.50 |
| 16:0 | 13.45 ± 9.13 | 22.72 ± 2.04 | 24.55 ± 6.56 |
| 17:0 | 1.80 ± 1.39 | 1.00 ± 0.13 | 1.69 ± 0.78 |
| 18:0 | 9.16 ± 5.10 | 5.83 ± 0.51 | 9.07 ± 2.03 |
| 20:0 | 0.31 ± 0.20 | 0.25 ± 0.06 | 0.50 ± 0.17 |
| SAF | 28.63 ± 6.98 | 32.80 ± 2.24 | 42.45 ± 10.38 |
| 16:1n7 | 0.49 ± 0.18 | 0.34 ± 0.06 | 3.82 ± 1.98 |
| 17:1n7 | 0.83 ± 2.62 | 0.03 ± 0.06 | 1.13 ± 0.49 |
| 18:1n9c | 3.81 ± 3.10 | 1.56 ± 0.25 | 7.79 ± 7.40 |
| 20:1 | 12.28 ± 2.84 | 6.06 ± 1.08 | 6.08 ± 2.78 |
| 22:1n9 | 0.36 ± 0.13 | 0.22 ± 0.04 | 0.50 ± 0.30 |
| 24:1n9 | 0.33 ± 0.11 | 0.18 ± 0.04 | 1.13 ± 0.36 |
| MUFA | 18.83 ± 4.17 | 8.84 ± 1.12 | 20.79 ± 6.37 |
| 18:2n6c | 0.32 ± 0.17 | 0.16 ± 0.07 | 1.01 ± 0.35 |
| 20:2 | 0.85 ± 0.33 | 0.37 ± 0.09 | 1.34 ± 0.61 |
| 20:3n3 | 3.67 ± 1.39 | 0.95 ± 0.61 | 0.93 ± 0.75 |
| 20:4n6(ARA) | 5.42 ± 1.53 | 2.08 ± 0.41 | 3.92 ± 1.47 |
| 22:2n6 | 0.49 ± 1.25 | 0.15 ± 0.09 | 0.14 ± 0.04 |
| 20:5n3(EPA) | 16.59 ± 8.47 | 11.90 ± 1.32 | 8.71 ± 3.74 |
| 22:6n3(DHA) | 24.63 ± 8.59 | 42.26 ± 1.45 | 19.75 ± 10.94 |
| PUFA | 52.54 ± 7.42 | 58.35 ± 1.62 | 36.76 ± 11.59 |
| ∑FAs<0.5% | 4.63 ± 2.33 | 4.36 ± 1.06 | 2.57 ± 0.49 |
| total FAs | 107.46 ± 47.98 | 95.25 ± 37.91 | 234.82 ± 111.33 |
FAs <0.5% include 15:0, 20:0, 16:1n7, 17:1n7, 22:1n9, 24:1n9, 18:2n6c, 20:2, 22:2n6. ARA, arachidonic acid; EPA, eicosapentaenoic acid; DHA, docosahexaenoic acid; SFA, saturated fatty acids; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acids; total FAs, total fatty acids. Values are mean ± standard deviation; total FAs is reported as dry tissue weight (mg/g dry weight), other values are reported as percentages of total FAs (% total FAs).
Figure 1The relative content of saturated fatty acids (SFA), monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) in the ovary (a), mantle muscle (b), and digestive gland (c) of female D. gigas. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
Figure 2Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS) ordination of fatty acid composition for each tissue by maturity stage. (a) ovary; (b) mantle muscle; and (c) digestive gland.
Figure 3Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS) ordination of fatty acid composition between the ovary, muscle tissue and digestive gland for female D. gigas. (a) pooled over maturity stages; (b) immature animals (stages II and III); (c) mature animals (stages IV and V).
Results of analysis of similarity (ANOSIM) for the differences in fatty acid composition between the ovary, mantle muscle and digestive gland for female D. gigas by maturity stage.
| ANOSIM pairwise tests | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maturity stage | N | Ovary-Digestive gland | Ovary-Mantle | Mantle-Digestive gland | |||
| R value | Significance | R value | Significance | R value | Significance | ||
| II | 8 | 0.46 | 0.002 | 0.74 | 0.001 | 0.59 | 0.001 |
| III | 6 | 0.26 | 0.012 | 0.53 | 0.002 | 0.54 | 0.002 |
| IV | 5 | 0.20 | 0.026 | 0.46 | 0.023 | 0.32 | 0.028 |
| V | 5 | 0.41 | 0.008 | 0.65 | 0.002 | 0.56 | 0.001 |
| pooled | 24 | 0.32 | 0.001 | 0.54 | 0.001 | 0.57 | 0.001 |
The R value of ANOSIM ranges from −1 to 1; values close to 0 indicates high similarity.
Figure 4Linear regression between log mantle length and log body weight (a) and body condition distribution by maturity stage (b). Body condition is represented by the standardized residuals of a linear regression of log-body weight excluding ovary weight (log(BW-OvaW)) on log-mantle length (log(ML)). The solid blue line in (a) is the linear predictor (log(BW-OvaW) = −7.18 + 2.43 × log(ML); r2 = 0.90, P = 7.08e-13), with 95% confidence intervals in grey shading; Data in (b) are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
Figure 5Relationship between body condition and gonadosomatic index (a) and digestive gland index (b). Body condition (BC) is represented by the standardized residuals from the linear regression of log body weight excluding ovary weight on log mantle length. The solid blue lines are from linear regressions (a, GSI = 2.43 + 3.54 × BC; r2 = 0.41, P = 0.0004. b, DGI = 6.41–1.29 × BC; r2 = 0.21, P = 0.014), with 95% confidence intervals in grey shading.
Summary of biological measurements for female Dosidicus gigas collected from landings from commercial jig fishery in the eastern Pacific.
| Maturity stage | n | Mantle length (ML, mm) | Body weight (BW, g) | Ovary weight (OvaW, g) | Digestive gland weight (DgW, g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| II | 8 | 264.6 ± 34.7 | 578.5 ± 211.7 | 3.3 ± 1.3 | 41.6 ± 14.8 |
| III | 6 | 282.8 ± 23.1 | 749.0 ± 186.6 | 7.9 ± 2.4 | 54.7 ± 20.5 |
| IV | 5 | 291.2 ± 48.3 | 782.2 ± 303.0 | 20.4 ± 8.8 | 38.4 ± 18.9 |
| V | 5 | 289.9 ± 64.2 | 902.4 ± 401.0 | 86.9 ± 47.9 | 34.6 ± 22.0 |
| Pooled | 24 | 283.4 ± 42.7 | 743.5 ± 303.5 | 26.1 ± 39.4 | 43.8 ± 21.1 |
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.