| Literature DB >> 35203239 |
Chun-Lin Zhao1,2, Tian Zhao2, Jian-Yi Feng2, Li-Ming Chang2, Pu-Yang Zheng2, Shi-Jian Fu3, Xiu-Ming Li3, Bi-Song Yue1, Jian-Ping Jiang2, Wei Zhu2.
Abstract
The Chinese giant salamander (Andrias davidianus), one of the largest extant amphibian species, has dramatically declined in the wild. As an ectotherm, it may be further threatened by climate change. Therefore, understanding the thermal physiology of this species should be the priority to formulate related conservation strategies. In this study, the plasticity in metabolic rate and thermal tolerance limits of A. davidianus larvae were studied. Specifically, the larvae were acclimated to three temperature levels (7 °C, cold stress; 15 °C, optimum; and 25 °C, heat stress) and two diet items (red worm or fish fray) for 20 days. Our results indicated that cold-acclimated larvae showed increased metabolic capacity, while warm-acclimated larvae showed a decrease in metabolic capacity. These results suggested the existence of thermal compensation. Moreover, the thermal tolerance windows of cold-acclimated and warm-acclimated larvae shifted to cooler and hotter ranges, respectively. Metabolic capacity is not affected by diet but fish-fed larvae showed superiority in both cold and heat tolerance, potentially due to the input of greater nutrient loads. Overall, our results suggested a plastic thermal tolerance of A. davidianus in response to temperature and diet variations. These results are meaningful in guiding the conservation of this species.Entities:
Keywords: Andrias davidianus; animal conservation; metabolic compensation; physiological plasticity; respiration rate; thermal limits
Year: 2022 PMID: 35203239 PMCID: PMC8868240 DOI: 10.3390/ani12040531
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Figure 1Plasticity in metabolic capacity after thermal and diet acclimation. (A) Experimental design. (B) Variations between thermal-acclimated groups. (C) Variations between diet-acclimated groups. The data were analyzed by ANCOVA (test temperature as covariant) and LSD post hoc test; the results are detailed in Table 2. Different letters denote significant differences between groups.
Nutrient compositions of worm and fish diet. Values are presented as mean ± SE.
| Nutrients | Worm Diet | Fish Diet |
|---|---|---|
| Water | 90.01 ± 0.3 | 69.61 ± 0.6 |
| Lipids | 1.21 ± 0.1 | 8.66 ± 0.8 |
| Proteins | 5.11 ± 0.2 | 17.70 ± 0.3 |
| Carbohydrates | 1.65 ± 0.2 | 0.39 ± 0.0 |
Figure 2Plasticity in thermal limits after thermal and diet acclimation. (A) Experimental design. (B,C) Variations between thermal-acclimated groups. Different letters denote significant differences (p < 0.05) between groups; Kruskal–Wallis test. (D,E) Variations between diet-acclimated groups. The differences between worm and fish diets were analyzed by Mann–Whitney U test; **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001.
Influences of temperature and diet acclimation on metabolic rate. The differences between groups were analyzed with ANCOVA, with test temperature as covariant.
| Factors | Type III Sum of Square | df | Mean Square | F Value | Sig. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acclimation temperature (AT) | 1023.872 | 2 | 511.936 | 10.987 | 0.002 |
| Test temperature | 12,955.612 | 1 | 12,955.612 | 278.041 | <0.001 |
| Diet | 21.827 | 1 | 21.827 | 0.468 | 0.508 |
| AT × Diet | 199.824 | 2 | 99.912 | 2.144 | 0.164 |