Physiological and behavioral consequences of long-term artificial selection for vulnerability to recreational angling in a teleost fish
Physiological and behavioral consequences of long-term artificial selection for vulnerability to recreational angling in a teleost fish
复制标题
DOI：
10.1086/520618
复制
发表时间：
2007-09-01
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
Philipp, David P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cooke, Steven J.;Suski, Cory D.;Philipp, David P.
很少有研究考察渔业诱导选择的生理和行为后果。本研究评估了4代休闲垂钓脆弱性人工截断选择（即高脆弱性和低脆弱性选择[分别为HVF和LVF]）对硬骨鱼大口黑鲈心血管生理和亲代抚育行为的影响。在可能的情况下，我们将人工选择的鱼与从野外采集的对照鱼（CF）进行比较。虽然与对照鱼相比，LVF组的静息心脏活动降低了18%，HVF组的静息心脏活动提高了20%，但最大值在不同处理之间没有变化。结果，HVF的心脏范围小于LVF或CF。运动后HVF和CF的恢复速度相似，但LVF的恢复速度较慢。当从事亲代抚育活动时，巢内雄性HVF比雄性LVF更容易被捕获。在亲代抚育期间，HVF也有更高的转身率、胸鳍和尾鳍跳动率、对捕食者的警惕性增强和更高的原位游泳速度。能量学模拟表明，为了达到相同的生长水平，代谢率的差异将要求HVF比LVF多消耗大约40%的食物。对倾斜脆弱性的选择导致了生理和能量属性的明显差异。对钓鱼的脆弱性不仅是一种遗传性状，而且与较高的代谢率、较小的代谢范围和增加的亲代照顾活动等因素有关。尽管存在这些能量消耗上的差异，但相同年龄的HVF和LVF的大小相似，这表明在HVF中增加的食物消耗补偿了实验池塘中增加的成本。最终，倾斜脆弱性似乎是许多因素的复杂相互作用，导致选择非常不同的表型。如果有选择地从一个种群中捕捞HVF，那么该种群中剩余的鱼在提供亲代照顾方面可能效果较差，从而可能降低生殖产量。许多淡水系统中强大的钓鱼压力，因此在野外发生这种情况的可能性，需要认识到钓鱼潜在的进化后果的管理方法。
Few studies have examined the physiological and behavioral consequences of fisheries-induced selection. We evaluated how four generations of artificial truncation selection for vulnerability to recreational angling (i.e., stocks selected for high and low vulnerability [HVF and LVF, respectively]) affected cardiovascular physiology and parental care behavior in the teleost fish largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. Where possible, we compared artificially selected fish to control fish (CF) collected from the wild. Although, compared to control fish, resting cardiac activity was similar to 18% lower for LVF and similar to 20% higher for HVF, maximal values did not vary among treatments. As a result, the HVF had less cardiac scope than either LVF or CF. Recovery rates after exercise were similar for HVF and CF but slower for LVF. When engaged in parental care activities, nesting male HVF were captured more easily than male LVF. During parental care, HVF also had higher turning rates and pectoral and caudal fin beat rates, increased vigilance against predators, and higher in situ swimming speeds. Energetics simulations indicated that to achieve the same level of growth, the disparity in metabolic rates would require HVF to consume approximately 40% more food than LVF. Selection for angling vulnerability resulted in clear differences in physiological and energetic attributes. Not only is vulnerability to angling a heritable trait, but high vulnerability covaries with factors including higher metabolic rates, reduced metabolic scope, and increased parental care activity. Despite these energetically costly differences, HVF and LVF of the same age were of similar size, suggesting that heightened food consumption in HVF compensated for added costs in experimental ponds. Ultimately, angling vulnerability appears to be a complex interaction of numerous factors leading to selection for very different phenotypes. If HVF are selectively harvested from a population, the remaining fish in that population may be less effective in providing parental care, potentially reducing reproductive output. The strong angling pressure in many freshwater systems, and therefore the potential for this to occur in the wild, necessitate management approaches that recognize the potential evolutionary consequences of angling.