Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 69, Issue 1–4, pp 21–36 | Cite as

Migration of Pacific Rim Chum Salmon on the High Seas: Insights from Genetic Data

  • Lisa W. Seeb
  • Penelope A. Crane
  • Christine M. Kondzela
  • Richard L. Wilmot
  • Shigehiko Urawa
  • Natalya V. Varnavskaya
  • James E. Seeb

Abstract

Wild stocks of chum salmon, Oncorhynchus keta, have experienced recent declines in some areas of their range. Also, the release of hatchery chum salmon has escalated to nearly three billion fish annually. The decline of wild stocks and the unknown effects of hatchery fish combined with the uncertainty of future production caused by global climate change have renewed interest in the migratory patterns of chum salmon on the high seas. We studied the composition of high-seas mixtures of maturing and immature individuals using baseline data for 20 allozyme loci from 356 populations from throughout the Pacific Rim. Composition estimates were made from three time series. Two of these time series were from important coastal migratory corridors: the Shumagin Islands south of the Alaska Peninsula and the east coast of the Kamchatka Peninsula. The third was from chum salmon captured incidentally in the Bering Sea trawl fishery for walleye pollock. We also analyzed geographically dispersed collections of chum salmon captured in the month of July. The time series show dynamic changes in stock composition. The Shumagin Island corridor was used primarily by Northwest Alaskan and Asian populations in June; by the end of July stocks from the Alaska Peninsula and southern North America dominated the composition. The composition along the Kamchatka coast changed dramatically from primarily Russian stocks in May to primarily Japanese stocks in August; the previously undocumented presence of stocks from the Alaska Peninsula and Gulf of Alaska was also demonstrated. Immature chum salmon from throughout the Pacific Rim, including large proportions of southern North American stocks, contributed to the Bering Sea bycatch during the months of September and October. The migration routes of North American stocks is far more widespread than previously observed, and the Bering Sea is an important rearing area for maturing and immature chum salmon from throughout the species' range.

Oncorhynchus keta mixed stock analyses allozyme electrophoresis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beamish, R.J. & D.R. Bouillon. 1993. Pacific salmon production trends in relation to climate. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 50: 1002–1016.Google Scholar
  2. Brannon, E.L. 1984. Influence of stock origin of salmon migratory behavior. pp. 103–111. In: J.D. McCleave (ed.) Mechanisms of Migration in Fishes. NATO Conference Series IV, Marine Sciences Vol. 14, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. & A.W.F. Edwards. 1967. Phylogenetic analysis: Models and estimation procedures. Evolution 21: 550–570.Google Scholar
  4. Chakraborty, R. & O. Leimar. 1987. Genetic variation within a subdivided population. pp. 89–120. In: N. Ryman & F.M. Utter (ed.) Population Genetics and Fishery Management, University of Washington Press, Seattle.Google Scholar
  5. Debevec, E.M., R.B. Gates, M. Masuda, J. Pella, J. Reynolds & L.W. Seeb. 2000. SPAM (Version 3.2): Statistics program for analyzing mixtures. J. Hered. 91: 509–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Farley, E.V. Jr. & K. Munk. 1997. Incidence of thermally marked pink and chum salmon in the coastal water of the Gulf of Alaska. Alaska Fish. Res. Bull. 4: 181–187.Google Scholar
  7. Gilbert, C.H. & W.H. Rich. 1926. Second experiment in tagging salmon in the Alaska Peninsula fisheries reservation, summer of 1923. Bull. U.S. Bureau Fish. 42: 27–75.Google Scholar
  8. Kaeriyama, M. 1998. Dynamics of chum salmon, Oncorhynchus keta, populations released from Hokkaido, Japan. N. Pac. Anadr. Fish Comm. Bull. No. 1: 90–102.Google Scholar
  9. Kondzela, C.M., C.M. Guthrie, S.L. Hawkins, C.D. Russell, J.H. Helle & A.J. Gharrett. 1994. Genetic relationships among chum salmon populations in southeast Alaska and northern British Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51: 50–64.Google Scholar
  10. Loughlin, T.R. & K. Ohtani. 1996. Dynamics of the Bering Sea. University of Alaska Sea Grant, AK-SG-99-03. Fairbanks. 825 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Mahnken, C., G. Ruggerone, W. Waknize & T. Flagg. 1998. A historical perspective on salmonid production from Pacific Rim hatcheries. N. Pac. Anadr. Fish Comm. Bull. 1: 38–53.Google Scholar
  12. National Research Council (NRC). 1996. The Bering Sea Ecosystem, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  13. Nei, M. 1973. Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 70: 3321–3323.Google Scholar
  14. Patton, W.S., K.W. Myers & R.V. Walker. 1998. Origins of chum salmon caught incidentally in the eastern Bering Sea walleye pollock trawl fishery as estimated from scale pattern analysis. N. Am. J. Fish. Management 18: 704–712.Google Scholar
  15. Phelps, S.R., L.L. Leclair, S. Young & H.L. Blankenship. 1994. Genetic diversity patterns of chum salmon in the Pacific Northwest. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51: 65–83.Google Scholar
  16. Radchenko, V.I. 1998. Historical trends of fisheries and stock condition of Pacific salmon in Russia. N. Pac. Anadr. Fish. Comm. Bull. No. 1: 28–37.Google Scholar
  17. Salo, E.O. 1991. Life history of chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta). pp. 231–309. In: C. Groot & L. Margolis (ed.) Pacific Salmon Life Histories, UBC Press, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Google Scholar
  18. Sapozhnikov, V.V. 1999. Mesoscale anticyclonic eddies at the shelf break and their impact on the formation of hydrochemical structures of the Bering Sea. pp. 251–259. In: T.R. Loughlin & K. Ohtani (ed.) Dynamics of the Bering Sea, University of Alaska Sea Grant, AK-SG-03, Fairbanks.Google Scholar
  19. Seeb, L.W. & P.A. Crane. 1999a. High genetic heterogeneity in chum salmon in Western Alaska, the contact zone between northern and southern lineages. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 128: 58–87.Google Scholar
  20. Seeb, L.W. & P.A. Crane. 1999b. Allozymes and mitochondrial DNA discriminate Asian and North American populations of chum salmon in mixed-stock fisheries along the south coast of the Alaska Peninsula. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 128: 88–103.Google Scholar
  21. Smouse, P.E., R.S. Waples & J.A. Tworek. 1990. A genetic mixture analysis for use with incomplete source population data. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 47: 620–634.Google Scholar
  22. Sukhanova, I.R., H.J. Semina & M.V. Venttsel. 1999. Spatial distribution and temporal variability of phytoplankton in the Bering Sea. pp. 453–483. In: T.R. Loughlin & K. Ohtani (ed.) Dynamics of the Bering Sea, University of Alaska Sea Grant, AK-SG-99-03, Fairbanks.Google Scholar
  23. Urawa, S., M. Kawana, G. Anma, Y. Kamei, T. Shoji, M. Fukuwaka, K.M. Munk, K.W. Myers & E.V. Farley Jr. 2000. Geographic origin of high-seas chum salmon determined by genetic and thermal otolith markers. N. Pac. Anadr. Fish Comm. Bull. 2: 283–290.Google Scholar
  24. Wilmot, R.L., R.J. Everett, W.J. Spearman, R. Baccus, N.V. Varnavskaya & S.V. Putivkin. 1994. Genetic stock structure of Western Alaska chum salmon and a comparison with Russian Far East stocks. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51: 84–94.Google Scholar
  25. Wilmot, R.L., C.M. Kondzela, C.M. Guthrie & M. Masuda. 1998. Genetic stock identification of chum salmon harvested incidentally in the 1994 and 1995 Bering Sea trawl fishery. N. Pac. Anadr. Fish Comm. Bull. No. 1: 285–299.Google Scholar
  26. Winans, G.A., P.B. Aebersold, Y. Ishida & S. Urawa. 1998. Genetic stock identification of chum salmon in highseas test fisheries in the Western North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea. N. Pac. Anadr. Fish Comm. Bull. No. 1: 220–226.Google Scholar
  27. Winans, G.A., P.B. Aebersold, S. Urawa & N.V. Varnavskaya. 1994. Determining continent of origin of chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) using genetic stock identification techniques: Status of allozyme baseline in Asia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51: 95–113.Google Scholar
  28. Wood, C.C., S. McKinnell, T.J. Mulligan & D.A. Fournier. 1987. Stock identification with the maximum-likelihood mixture model: Sensitivity analysis and application to complex problems. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44: 866–881.Google Scholar
  29. Wooster, W. 1992. King crab dethroned. pp. 15–30. In: M.H. Glanz (ed.) Climate Variability, Climate Change, and Fisheries, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lisa W. Seeb
    • 1
  • Penelope A. Crane
    • 1
  • Christine M. Kondzela
    • 3
  • Richard L. Wilmot
    • 3
  • Shigehiko Urawa
    • 4
  • Natalya V. Varnavskaya
    • 5
  • James E. Seeb
    • 1
  1. 1.Alaska Department of Fish and GameGene Conservation LaboratoryAnchorageU.S.A.
  2. 2.Conservation Genetics LaboratoryU.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceAnchorageU.S.A.
  3. 3.National Marine Fisheries ServiceAuke Bay LaboratoryJuneauU.S.A.
  4. 4.National Salmon Resources CenterFisheries Agency of JapanToyohira-ku, SapporoJapan
  5. 5.Kamchatka Research Institute of Fisheries and OceanographyPetropavlovski-Kamchatsky, Naberejnaya 18Russia

Personalised recommendations