Advertisement

Oecologia

pp 1–8 | Cite as

Migration to freshwater increases growth rates in a facultatively catadromous tropical fish

  • Brien H. RobertsEmail author
  • John R. Morrongiello
  • Alison J. King
  • David L. Morgan
  • Thor M. Saunders
  • Jon Woodhead
  • David A. Crook
Highlighted Student Research

Abstract

Diadromy is a form of migration where aquatic organisms undergo regular movements between fresh and marine waters for the purposes of feeding and reproduction. Despite having arisen in independent lineages of fish, gastropod molluscs and crustaceans, the evolutionary drivers of diadromous migration remain contentious. We test a key aspect of the ‘productivity hypothesis’, which proposes that diadromy arises in response to primary productivity differentials between marine and freshwater habitats. Otolith chemistry and biochronology data are analysed in a facultatively catadromous tropical fish (barramundi, Lates calcarifer) to determine the effect of freshwater residence on growth rates. Individuals that accessed freshwater grew ~ 25% faster on average than estuarine residents in the year following migration, suggesting that catadromy provides a potential fitness advantage over non-catadromous (marine/estuarine) life histories, as predicted by the productivity hypothesis. Although diadromous barramundi exhibited faster growth than non-diadromous fish, we suggest that the relative reproductive success of diadromous and non-diadromous contingents is likely to be strongly influenced by local environmental variability such as temporal differences in river discharge, and that this may facilitate the persistence of diverse life history strategies within populations.

Keywords

Diadromy Partial migration Life history Biochronology Otolith chemistry 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Northern Territory Fisheries and anonymous recreational and commercial fishermen for providing the otoliths used in this study. Jonathan Taylor assisted with otolith preparation. The research is supported through funding from the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program, Charles Darwin University and an Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend Scholarship.

Author contribution statement

BR and DC designed the research. BR performed biochronological analyses, analysed the data and wrote the manuscript. TS provided otoliths used in this study. JW and BR conducted microchemical analyses. JM provided statistical expertise. DC, JM, DM, AK and TS discussed and interpreted the results and edited the manuscript.

Supplementary material

442_2019_4460_MOESM1_ESM.docx (39 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 38 kb)

References

  1. Arai T, Kotake A, Lokman PM, Miller MJ, Tsukamoto K (2004) Evidence of different habitat use by New Zealand freshwater eels Anguilla australis and A. dieffenbachii, as revealed by otolith microchemistry. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 266:213–225.  https://doi.org/10.3354/meps266213 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball JP, Nordengren C, Wallin K (2001) Partial migration by large ungulates: characteristics of seasonal moose Alces alces ranges in northern Sweden. Wildlife Biol 7:39–47.  https://doi.org/10.2981/wlb.2001.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barneche DR, Robertson DR, White CR, Marshall DJ (2018) Fish reproductive-energy output increases disproportionately with body size. Science 360:642–645.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao6868 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bisazza A, Marconato A (1988) Female mate choice, male-male competition and parental care in the river bullhead, Cottus gobio L. (Pisces, Cottidae). Anim Behav 36:1352–1360.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(88)80204-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bloom DD, Lovejoy NR (2014) The evolutionary origins of diadromy inferred from a time-calibrated phylogeny for Clupeiformes (herring and allies). Proc R Soc B 281:2013–2081.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2081 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bœuf G, Payan P (2001) How should salinity influence fish growth? Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol 130:411–423.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1532-0456(01)00268-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bond MH, Miller JA, Quinn TP (2015) Beyond dichotomous life histories in partially migrating populations: cessation of anadromy in a long-lived fish. Ecology 96:1899–1910.  https://doi.org/10.1890/14-1551.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cairns DK, Secor DA, Morrison WE, Hallet JA (2009) Salinity-linked growth in anguillid eels and the paradox of temperate-zone catadromy. J Fish Biol 74:2094–2114.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02290.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campana SE (1990) How reliable are growth back-calculations based on otoliths? Can J Fish Aquat Sci 47:2219–2227.  https://doi.org/10.1139/f90-246 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Campana SE, Thorrold SR (2001) Otoliths, increments, and elements: keys to a comprehensive understanding of fish populations? Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:30–38.  https://doi.org/10.1139/f00-177 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chapman BB, Brönmark C, Nilsson J-Å, Hansson L-A (2011) The ecology and evolution of partial migration. Oikos 120:1764–1775.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2011.20131.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chapman BB, Skov C, Hulthén K, Brodersen J, Nilsson PA, Hansson LA, Brönmark C (2012) Partial migration in fishes: definitions, methodologies and taxonomic distribution. J Fish Biol 81:479–499.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2012.03349.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crook DA, Lowe WH, Allendorf FW, Erős T, Finn DS, Gillanders BM, Hadwen WL, Harrod C, Hermoso V, Jennings S, Kilada RW, Nagelkerken I, Hansen MM, Page TJ, Riginos C, Fry B, Hughes JM (2015) Human effects on ecological connectivity in aquatic ecosystems: integrating scientific approaches to support management and mitigation. Sci Total Environ 534:52–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crook DA, Buckle DJ, Allsop Q, Baldwin W, Saunders TM, Kyne PM, Woodhead JD, Maas R, Roberts B, Douglas MM (2017) Use of otolith chemistry and acoustic telemetry to elucidate migratory contingents in barramundi Lates calcarifer. Mar Freshwater Res 68:1554–1566.  https://doi.org/10.1071/MF16177 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Leenheer P, Mohapatra A, Ohms HA, Lytle DA, Cushing J (2017) The puzzle of partial migration: adaptive dynamics and evolutionary game theory perspectives. J Theor Biol 412:172–185.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2016.10.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Douglas MM, Bunn SE, Davies PM (2005) River and wetland food webs in Australia’s wet–dry tropics: general principles and implications for management. Mar Freshw Res 56:329–342.  https://doi.org/10.1071/MF04084 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Durham B, Wilde G (2009) Effects of streamflow and intermittency on the reproductive success of two broadcast-spawning cyprinid fishes. Copeia 2009:21–28.  https://doi.org/10.1643/CE-07-166 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elsdon TS, Wells BK, Campana SE, Gillanders BM, Jones CM, Limburg KE, Secor DH, Thorrold SR, Walther BD (2008) Otolith chemistry to describe movements and life-history parameters of fishes: hypotheses, assumptions, limitations and inferences. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 46:297–330Google Scholar
  20. Feutry P, Castelin M, Ovenden JR, Dettaï A, Robinet T, Cruaud C, Keith P (2013) Evolution of diadromy in fish: insights from a tropical genus (Kuhlia species). Am Nat 181:52–63.  https://doi.org/10.1086/668593 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fleming IA (1996) Reproductive strategies of Atlantic salmon: ecology and evolution. Rev Fish Biol Fisher 6:379–416.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00164323 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gillanders BM, Izzo C, Doubleday ZA, Ye Q (2015) Partial migration: growth varies between resident and migratory fish. Biol Let.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2014.0850 Google Scholar
  23. Grey DL (1987) An overview of Lates calcarifer in Australia and Asia. In: Copland IW, Grey DL (eds) Management of wild and cultured sea bass/barramundi (Lates calcarifer): proceedings of an international workshop held at Darwin, NT, Australia, 24–30 Sept 1986. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, Canberra, pp 15–21Google Scholar
  24. Gross MR (1987) Evolution of diadromy in fishes. In: American fisheries society symposium, pp 14–25Google Scholar
  25. Gross MR, Coleman RM, McDowall RM (1988) Aquatic productivity and the evolution of diadromous fish migration. Science 239:1291–1293.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.239.4845.1291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hansson L-A, Hylander S (2009) Size-structured risk assessments govern Daphnia migration. Proc Roy Soc B 276:331–336.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.1088 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hendry AP, Bohlin T, Jonsson B, Berg OK (2004) To sea or not to sea. Evolution illuminated. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 92–125Google Scholar
  28. Hogan JD, Blum MJ, Gilliam JF, Bickford N, McIntyre PB (2014) Consequences of alternative dispersal strategies in a putatively amphidromous fish. Ecology 95:2397–2408.  https://doi.org/10.1890/13-0576.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hughes JM, Schmidt DJ, Macdonald JI, Huey JA, Crook DA (2014) Low inter-basin connectivity in a facultatively diadromous fish: evidence from genetics and otolith chemistry. Mol Ecol 23:1000–1013.  https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12373 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jardine TD, Pusey BJ, Hamilton SK, Pettit NE, Davies PM, Douglas MM, Sinnamon V, Halliday IA, Bunn SE (2012) Fish mediate high food web connectivity in the lower reaches of a tropical floodplain river. Oecologia 168:829–838.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-011-2148-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Junk W, Bayley PB, Sparks RE (1989) The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems. In: Dodge DP (ed) Proceedings of the international large river symposium, vol 106. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, pp 110–127Google Scholar
  32. Kendall NW, McMillan JR, Sloat MR, Buehrens TW, Quinn TP, Pess GR, Kuzishchin KV, McClure MM, Zabel RW (2014) Anadromy and residency in steelhead and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): a review of the processes and patterns. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 72:319–342.  https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2014-0192 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kraus RT, Secor DH (2004) Dynamics of white perch Morone americana population contingents in the Patuxent River estuary, Maryland, USA. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 279:247–259.  https://doi.org/10.3354/meps279247 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lundberg P (1988) The evolution of partial migration in birds. Trends Ecol Evolut 3:172–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(88)90035-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McDowall RM (1988) Diadromy in fishes: migrations between freshwater and marine environments. Croom Helm, ChristchurchGoogle Scholar
  36. McDowall RM (1997) The evolution of diadromy in fishes (revisited) and its place in phylogenetic analysis. Rev Fish Biol Fish 7:443–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McDowall RM (1998) Driven by diadromy: its role in the historical and ecological biogeography of the New Zealand freshwater fish fauna. Ital J Zool 65:73–85.  https://doi.org/10.1080/11250009809386799 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McDowall R (1999) Different kinds of diadromy: different kinds of conservation problems. ICES J Mar Sci 56:410–413.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jmsc.1999.0450 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Monro K, Marshall DJ (2014) Faster is not always better: selection on growth rate fluctuates across life history and environments. Am Nat 183:798–809.  https://doi.org/10.1086/676006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Morrongiello JR, Thresher RE (2015) A statistical framework to explore ontogenetic growth variation among individuals and populations: a marine fish example. Ecol Monogr 85:93–115.  https://doi.org/10.1890/13-2355.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Morrongiello JR, Thresher RE, Smith DC (2012) Aquatic biochronologies and climate change. Nat Clim Chang 2:849–857.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1616 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Myers GS (1949) Usage of anadromous, catadromous and allied terms for migratory fishes. Copeia 2:89–97.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1438482 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nakagawa S, Schielzeth H (2013) A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol Evol 4:133–142.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Perez KO, Munch SB (2010) Extreme selection on size in the early lives of fish. Evolution 64(8):2450–2457.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2010.00994.x Google Scholar
  45. RStudio Team (2016) RStudio: integrated development for R. RStudio Inc, BostonGoogle Scholar
  46. Schindler DE, Hilborn R, Chasco B, Boatright CP, Quinn TP, Rogers LA, Webster MS (2010) Population diversity and the portfolio effect in an exploited species. Nature 465:609-612. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7298/suppinfo/nature09060_S1.html. Accessed 7 Feb 2018
  47. Snyder RJ (1991) Migration and life histories of the threespine stickleback: evidence for adaptive variation in growth rate between populations. Environ Biol Fishes 31:381–388.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00002363 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sponaugle S, Grorud-Colvert K, Pinkard D (2006) Temperature-mediated variation in early life history traits and recruitment success of the coral reef fish Thalassoma bifasciatum in the Florida Keys. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 308:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.3354/meps308001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stuart I, McKillup S (2002) The use of sectioned otoliths to age barramundi (Lates calcarifer) (Bloch, 1790) [Centropomidae]. Hydrobiologia 479:231–236.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021021720945 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wipfli MS, Hudson JP, Caouette JP, Chaloner DT (2003) Marine subsidies in freshwater ecosystems: salmon carcasses increase the growth rates of stream-resident salmonids. Trans Am Fish Soc 132:371–381.  https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8659(2003)132%3c0371:MSIFES%3e2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Woodhead J, Swearer S, Hergt J, Maas R (2005) In situ Sr-isotope analysis of carbonates by LA-MC-ICP-MS: interference corrections, high spatial resolution and an example from otolith studies. J Anal Atom Spectrom 20:22–27.  https://doi.org/10.1039/B412730G CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Institute for the Environment and LivelihoodsCharles Darwin UniversityDarwinAustralia
  2. 2.School of BioSciencesThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Freshwater Fish Group and Fish Health Unit, Centre for Sustainable Aquatic Ecosystems, Harry Butler InstituteMurdoch UniversityMurdochAustralia
  4. 4.Fisheries Research, Department of Primary Industries and FisheriesBerrimahAustralia
  5. 5.School of Earth SciencesThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations