Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 97, Issue 9, pp 1057–1065

Kin structure and social organization in the spotted eagle ray, Aetobatus narinari, off coastal Sarasota, FL

  • Jennifer Newby
  • Tanya Darden
  • Kim Bassos-Hull
  • Andrew M. Shedlock
Article

Abstract

Observations of elasmobranchs in groups suggest sociality in sharks and rays. However we currently lack a strong understanding of social structure and the role kinship has in structuring group organization in cartilaginous fishes. The spotted eagle ray, Aetobatus narinari (Euphrasen, 1790) frequents the shallow waters near Sarasota, FL, often in pairs or groups suggesting a social component to their behavior. In the present study, eight eagle ray-specific microsatellite markers were used to investigate relatedness in A. narinari groups, and used to determine if kin structure contributed to group organization. Using regression-based and maximum-likelihood approaches, relatedness was quantified and compared within and among groups of juveniles, and adults in mixed sex and same sex groups. Results showed a lack of kin-structured sociality in A. narinari, suggesting factors apart from relatedness shape social interactions among spotted eagle rays in the near-shore waters of Sarasota, FL. Our results add to the limited amount of published literature on elasmobranch kinship, which are important for understanding implications of anthropogenic disturbance on genetic variability for coastal populations.

Keywords

Elasmobranch genetics Spotted eagle ray Microsatellite genotyping Gulf of Mexico Social behavior Kinship 

References

  1. Ajemian MJ, Powers SP, Murdoch TJT (2012) Estimating the potential impacts of large mesopredators on benthic resources: integrative assessment of spotted eagle ray foraging ecology in Bermuda. PloS one 7(7): e40227. doi:10.13871/journal.pone.0040227Google Scholar
  2. Archie EA, Moss CJ, Alberts SC (2006) The ties that bind: genetic relatedness predicts the fission and fusion of social groups in wild African elephants. Proc R Soc B 273(1586):513–522PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baum JK, Myers RA, Kehler DG, Worm B, Harley SJ, Doherty PA (2003) Collapse and conservation of shark populations in the northwest Atlantic. Science 299:389–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bassos-Hull K, Wilkinson KA, Hull PT, Dougherty DA, Omori KL, Ailloud LE, Morris J, Heuter RE (2014) Life history and seasonal occurrence of the spotted eagle ray, Aetobatus narinari, in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. Environ Biol Fish. Submitted-in revision, same issueGoogle Scholar
  5. Beecham JA, Farnsworth KD (1999) Animal group forces resulting from predator avoidance and competition minimization. J Theor Biol 198(4):533–548PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bigg MA, Olesiuk PF, Ellis GM, Ford JKB, Balcomb KC (1990) Social organization and genealogy of resident killer whales (Orcinus orca) in the coastal waters of British Columbia and Washington State. Report of the International Whaling Commission, Special 12:383–405Google Scholar
  7. Blouin MS (2003) DNA-based methods for pedigree reconstruction and kinship analysis in natural populations. Trends Ecol Evol 18:503–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chang Z, Yang B, Vigilant L, Liu Z, Ren B, Yang J, Xiang Z, Garber P, Li M (2014) Evidence of male‐biased dispersal in the endangered Sichuan snub‐nosed monkey (Rhinopithexus roxellana). Am J Primatol 76(1):72–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coles RJ (1910) Observations of the habits and distribution of certain fishes taken on the coast of North Carolina. 50.7 (75.6)Google Scholar
  10. Corcoran MJ, Gruber SH (1999) The use of photoidentification to study social organization of the spotted eagle ray, Aetobatus narinari (Euphrasen 1790). Bahamas J Sci 7(1):21–27Google Scholar
  11. Cotterman CW (1941) Relatives and human genetic analysis. The Scientific Monthly 53:227–234Google Scholar
  12. Croft DP, James R, Thomas P, Hathaway C, Mawdsley D, Laland KN, Krause J (2006) Social structure and co-operative interactions in a wild population of guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:644–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Croft DP, Hamilton PB, Darden SK, Jacoby DMP, James R, Bettaney EM, Tyler CR (2012) The role of relatedness in structuring the social network of a wild guppy population. Oecol. doi:10.1007/s00442-012-2379-8 Google Scholar
  14. Dobson FS, Viblanc VA, Arnaud CM, Muries JO (2011) Kin selection in Columbian ground squirrels: direct and indirect fitness benefits. Mol Ecol. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05218.x Google Scholar
  15. Dugdale HL, Macdonald DW, Pope LC, Johnson PJ, Burke T (2008) Reproductive skew and relatedness in social groups of European badgers, Meles meles. Mol Ecol 17(7):1815–1827PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guttridge TL, Myrberg AA, Porcher IF, Sims DW, Krause J (2009a) The role of learning in shark behavior. Fish and Fish. doi:10.1111/j.1467-2979.2009.00339.x Google Scholar
  17. Guttridge TL, Gruber SH, Gledhill KS, Croft DP, Sims DW, Krause J (2009b) Social preferences of juvenile lemon sharks, Negaprion brevirostris. Anim Behav 78:543–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hamilton WD (1964) The genetical evolution of social behaviour. J Theor Biol 7(1):1–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heithaus MR, Burkholder D, Hueter RE, Heithaus LI, Pratt HL Jr, Carrier JC (2007) Spatial and temporal variation in shark communities of the lower Florida Keys and evidence for historical population declines. J Fish Aquat Sci 64(10):1302–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hoffman JI, Forcada J, Trathan PN, Amos W (2007) Female fur seals show active choice for males that are heterozygous and unrelated. Nature 445:912–914PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jacoby DM, Busawon DS, Sims DW (2010) Sex and social networking: the influence of male presence on social structure of female shark groups. Behav Ecol 21(4):808–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jacoby DMP, Croft DP, Sims DW (2011) Social behavior in sharks and rays: analysis, patterns and implications for conservation. Fish and Fish. doi:10.1111/j.1467-2979.2011.00436.x Google Scholar
  23. Kalinowski ST, Wagner AP, Taper ML (2006) ML-Relate: a computer program for maximum likelihood estimation of relatedness and relationship. Mol Ecol Notes 6:576–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krause J, Ruxton GD (2002) Living in groups. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  25. Last P, Stevens J (1994) Sharks and Rays of Australia. CSIRO, East MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  26. Larson S, Christiansen J, Griffing D, Ashe J, Lowry D, Andrews K (2011) Relatedness and polyandry of sixgill sharks, Hexanchus griseus, in an urban estuary. Cons Genet 12(3):679–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lynch M, Ritland K (1999) Estimation of pairwise relatedness with molecular markers. Genetics 152(4):1753–1766PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Mann J, Connor RC, Tyack PL, Whitehead H (2000) Cetacean Societies: Field Studies of Dolphins and Whales. University of Chicago Press; Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  30. McEachran JD, De Carvalho MR (2002) Dasyatidae. In: K.E. Carpenter (editor), The living marine resources of the western Central Atlantic. Vol. 1: Introduction, molluscs, crustaceans, hagfishes, sharks, batoid fishes and chimaeras. FAO Species Identification Guide for Fisheries Purposes and American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists Special Publication 5: 562–571. Rome: FAOGoogle Scholar
  31. Milligan BG (2003) Maximum likelihood estimation of relatedness. Genetics 163:1153–1167PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Mourier J, Vercelloni J, Planes S (2012) Evidence of social communities in a spatially structured network of a free-ranging shark species. Anim Behav 83(2):389–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Myers RA, Worm B (2003) Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities. Nature 423:280–283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Newby JN (2013) An assessment of population genetic and social structure in the spotted eagle ray, Aetobatus narinari, off Sarasota, FL and the southeastern United States. MS thesis, College of Charleston, Charleston, SCGoogle Scholar
  35. Queller DC, Goodnight KF (1989) Estimating relatedness using genetic markers. Evolution 43:258–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Queller DC, Strassmann JE, Hughes CR (1993) Microsatellites and kinship. Trends Ecol Evol 8:285–288PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. R Development Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. http://www.R-project.org
  38. Richard KR, Dillon MC, Whitehead H, Wright JM (1996) Patterns of kinship in groups of free-living sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) revealed by multiple molecular genetic analyses. P Natl Acad Sci 93(16):8792–8795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sellas AB, Bassos-Hull K, Hueter RE, Feldheim KA (2011) Isolation and characterization of polymorphic microsatellite markers from the spotted eagle ray (Aetobatus narinari). Conserv Genet Resour. doi:10.1007/s12686-011-9415-6 Google Scholar
  40. Silk JB, Alberts SC, Altmann J (2006) Social relationships among adult female baboons (Papio cynocephalus) II. Variation in the quality and stability of social bonds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61(2):197–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Silliman WR, Gruber SH (1999) Behavioral ecology of the spotted eagle ray, Aetobatus narinari (Euphrasen, 1790), in Bimini, Bahamas: an interim report. Bahamas J Sci B 7(1):13–20Google Scholar
  42. Tagliafico A, Rago N, Rangel S, Mendoza J (2012) Exploitation and reproduction of the spotted eagle ray (Aetobatus narinari) in the Los Frailes Archipelago, Venezuela. Fish B-NOAA 110:307–316Google Scholar
  43. Van Horn RC, Altmann J, Alberts SC (2008) Can’t get there from here: inferring kinship from pairwise genetic relatedness. Anim Behav 75(3):1173–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Viricel A, Strand AE, Rosel PE, Ridoux V, Garcia P (2008) Insights on common dolphin (Delphinusdelphis) social organization from genetic analysis of a mass-stranded pod. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63(2):173–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wagner AP, Creel S, Kalinowki ST (2006) Estimating relatedness and relationship using microsatellite loci with null alleles. Heredity 97:336–345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang J (2011) COANCESTRY: a program for simulating, estimating and analysing relatedness and inbreeding coefficients. Mol Ecol Resour 11(1):141–145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Whitlock MC, McCauley DE (1990) Some population genetic consequences of colony formation and extinction: genetic correlations within founding groups. Evolution 1717–1724Google Scholar
  48. Zeh JA, Zeh DW (2001) Reproductive mode and the genetic benefits of polyandry. Anim Behav 61(6):1051–1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jennifer Newby
    • 1
  • Tanya Darden
    • 2
  • Kim Bassos-Hull
    • 3
  • Andrew M. Shedlock
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Charleston Biology DepartmentCharlestonUSA
  2. 2.Marine Resources Research InstituteHollings Marine LabCharlestonUSA
  3. 3.The Center for Shark ResearchMote Marine LaboratorySarasotaUSA
  4. 4.Hollings Marine LaboratoryCharlestonUSA

Personalised recommendations