Abstract
Explanations for the phenotypical features resulting from colonization of subterranean environments have always been a source of controversy. Although a great number of cave organisms are blind, they nevertheless display responses to light. The interpretation of this phototactic responsiveness in cave-dwelling animals may provide clues on the general issue of evolution of behavior in parallel with specialized structures. We studied the phototactic responses in two amblyopsid fishes of North America and found responses to light only in the species reported to have a functional pineal organ. Our findings are consistent with the hypotheses that (1) adaptation to the cave environment is a gradual process and (2) responsiveness to light in cave fishes may best be understood as a relict character, one that exists in an environment where it may never be expressed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References cited
Barr, T.C. 1968. Cave ecology and the evolution of troglobites. pp. 35–102. In: T. Dobzhansky, M. Hecht & W. Steere (ed.) Evolutionary Biology, Volume 2, North Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam.
Bechler, D.L. 1983. The evolution of agonistic behavior in amblyopsid fishes. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 12: 35–42.
Brett, J.R. 1979. Environmental factors and growth. pp. 599–675. In: W.S. Hoar, D.J. Randall & J.R. Brett (ed.) Fish Physiology, Volume 8, Academic Press, New York.
Cooper, J.E. & R.A. Kuehne. 1974. Speoplatyrhinus poulsoni, a new genus and species of subterranean fish from Alabama. Copeia 1974: 486–493.
Culver, D.C. 1982. Cave life. Evolution and ecology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. 189 pp.
Culver, D.C., T.C. Kane & D.W. Fong. 1995. Adaptation and natural selection in caves. The evolution of Gammarus minus. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. 223 pp.
Eigenmann, C.H. 1909. Cave vertebrates of America. A study in degenerative evolution. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D.C. 241 pp.
Jernigan, R.W., D.C. Culver & D.W. Fong. 1994. The dual role of selection and evolutionary history as reflected in genetic correlations. Evolution 48: 587–596.
Johnson, K.W. 1967. Temperature responses of the Mexican blind cave-fishes of the genus Anoptichthys. M. Sc. Thesis, Texas Technological College, Lubbock. 53 pp.
Jones, R. & D.C. Culver. 1989. Evidence for selection on sensory structures in a cave population of Gammarus minus (Amphipoda). Evolution 43: 688–693.
Jones, R., D.C. Culver & T.C. Kane. 1992. Are parallel morphologies of cave organisms the result of similar selection pressures? Evolution 46: 353–365.
Kane, T.C. & R.C. Richardson. 1985. Regressive evolution: an historical perspective. Natl. Speleol. Soc. Bull. 47: 71–77.
Langecker, T. G. 1992. Light sensitivity of cave vertebrates — behavioral and morphological aspects. pp. 295–326. In: A.I. Camacho (ed.) The Natural History of Biospeleology. Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid.
Langecker, T.G. & G. Longley. 1993. Morphological adaptations of the Texas blind catfishes Trogloglanis pattersoni and Satan eurystomus (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae) to their underground environment. Copeia 1993: 976–986.
McNulty, J.A. 1978a. The pineal of the troglophilic fish, Chologaster agassizi: an ultrastructural study. J. Neural Trans. 43: 47–71.
McNulty, J.A. 1978b. Fine structure of the pineal organ in the troglobytic fish, Typhlichthyes subterraneous (Pisces: Amblyopsidae). Cell. Tiss. Res. 195: 535–545.
Parzefall, J. 1992. Behavioural aspects in animals living in caves. pp. 327–376. In: I.A. Camacho (ed.) The Natural History of Biospeleology, Madrid, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales.
Payne, R. 1907. The reactions of the blind fish, Amblyopsis spelaeus, to light. Biol. Bull. 13: 317–323.
Poulson, T.L. 1963. Cave adaptation in amblyopsid fishes. Amer. Midl. Nat. 70: 257–290.
Rohlf, F.J. & R.R. Sokal. 1981. Statistical tables, second edition. W.H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco. 219 pp.
Romero, A. 1984. Responses to light in cave and surface populations of Astyanax fasciatus (Pisces: Characidae): an evolutionary interpretation. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Miami, Coral Gables. 129 pp.
Romero, A. 1985a. Can evolution regress? Natl. Speleol. Soc. Bull. 47: 86–88.
Romero, A. 1985b. Ontogenetic change in phototactic responses of surface and cave populations of Astyanax fasciatus (Pisces: Characidae). Copeia 1985: 1004–1011.
Sket, B. 1985. Why all cave animals do not look alike — a discussion on adaptive value of reduction processes. Natl. Speleol. Soc. Bull. 47: 78–85.
Sokal, R.R. & F.J. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry, third edition. W.H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco. 887 pp.
Thinès, G. 1969. L'évolution régressive des poissons cavernicoles et abyssaux. Masson et Cie., Paris. 394 pp.
Vandel, A. 1965. Biospeleology. The biology of cavernicolous animals. Pergamon Press, New York. 524 pp.
Verrier, M.L. 1929. Observations sur le comportement d'un poisson cavernicole Typhlichthys osborni Eigenmann. Bull. Mus. Natn. Hist. Nat. Paris (Ser. 2) 1: 82–84.
Wilkens, H. 1993. Neutrale Mutationen und evolutionäre Fortentwicklung. Z. zool. Syst. Evolut.-forsch. 31: 98–109.
Woods, L.P. & R.F. Inger. 1957. The cave, spring, and swamp fishes of the family Amblyopsidae of central and eastern United States. Amer. Midl. Nat. 58: 232–256.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Green, S.M., Romero, A. Responses to light in two blind cave fishes (Amblyopsis spelaea and Typhlichthys subterraneus) (Pisces: Amblyopsidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes 50, 167–174 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007321031997
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007321031997