Abstract
Reintroductions are widely implemented as a means of reestablishing wild populations and genetic parentage methods can be used in concert with these efforts to monitor and evaluate efficacy. In addition to understanding demographic outcomes, reconstructed pedigrees, when combined with phenotypic data, can provide insight into the adaptive potential of reintroduced individuals. Here, we examined the heritability and evolvability of life-history traits and lifetime reproductive success in two threatened Chinook salmon populations undergoing reintroduction to historical habitats above dams in Oregon, USA, using previously-developed multigenerational genetic pedigrees. All of the examined life-history traits: length-at-maturity, age-at-maturity, and arrival timing to the spawning grounds, and lifetime reproductive success exhibited significant narrow-sense heritabilities and evolvabilities. There was also a detectable influence of parental effects (i.e., paternal or maternal effects) on life-history trait variation, suggesting that in addition to genetic effects, nongenetic inheritance mechanisms are influencing life-history diversity in the populations. Additionally, our analyses revealed evidence of natural selection on the date of reintroduction, although the form and intensity of selection differed between the two populations; the forms of selection also point to the potential for phenotype-environment mismatch under some conditions. Overall, our results suggest that these threatened Chinook salmon populations exhibit significant adaptive potential, a factor that should be important to the longer-term success of recovery efforts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data accessibility
Data for this study are available at: to be completed after manuscript is accepted for publication.
References
Abadia-Cardoso A, Anderson EC, Pearse DE, Garza J (2013) Large-scale parentage analysis reveals reproductive patterns and heritability of spawn timing in a hatchery population of steelhead. Mol Ecol 22:4733–4746. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12426
Araki H, Cooper B, Blouin MS (2009) Carry-over effect of captive breeding reduces reproductive fitness of wild-born descendants in the wild. Biol Lett 5:621–624. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0315
Armstrong DP, Seddon PJ (2008) Directions in reintroduction biology. Trends Ecol Evol 23:20–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2007.10.003
Banks MA, Sard NM, O’Malley KG et al (2015) A genetics-based evaluation of the spring Chinook salmon reintroduction program above Cougar Dam, South Fork McKenzie River, 2007–2015. Portland, OR
Brooks SP, Gelman A (1998) General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. J Comput Graph Stat 7:434–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/10618600.1998.10474787
Carlson SM, Seamons TR (2008) SYNTHESIS: A review of quantitative genetic components of fitness in salmonids: implications for adaptation to future change. Evol Appl 1:222–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4571.2008.00025.x
Christie MR, Marine ML, French RA, Blouin MS (2012) Genetic adaptation to captivity can occur in a single generation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:238–242. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1111073109
Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale
Dahl J, Dannewitz J, Karlsson L et al (2004) The timing of spawning migration: implications of environmental variation, life history, and sex. Can J Zool 82:1864–1870. https://doi.org/10.1139/z04-184
de Villemereuil P, Schielzeth H, Nakagawa S, Morrissey M (2016) General methods for evolutionary quantitative genetic inference from generalized mixed models. Genetics 204:1281 LP–L1294
Dickerson B, Willson MF, Bentzen P, Quinn TP (2005) Heritability of life history and morphological traits in a wild pink salmon population assessed by DNA parentage analysis. Trans Am Fish Soc 134:1323–1328. https://doi.org/10.1577/T04-006.1
Evans ML, Neff BD, Heath DD (2013) Behavioural and genetic analyses of mate choice and reproductive success in two Chinook salmon populations. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 270:263–270
Evans ML, Johnson MA, Jacobson DP et al (2016) Evaluating a multi-generational reintroduction program for threatened salmon using genetic parentage analysis. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 73:844–852
Fox CW, Bush ML, Wallin WG (2003) Maternal age affects offspring lifespan of the seed beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus. Funct Ecol 17:811–820. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2003.00799.x
Fraser DJ (2008) How well can captive breeding programs conserve biodiversity? A review of salmonids. Evol Appl 1:535–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4571.2008.00036.x
Gillespie JH, Turelli M (1989) Genotype-environment interactions and the maintenance of polygenic variation. Genetics 121:129–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12441
Goodnight CJ (1987) Epistasis and the effect of founder events on the additive genetic variance. Evolution 42:441–454
Griffith B, Scott J, Carpenter J, Reed C (1989) Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and strategy. Science 245:477–479
Gross MR (1985) Disruptive selection for alternative life histories in salmon. Nature 313:47–48
Gustafsson L (1986) Lifetime reproductive success and heritability: empirical support for Fisher’s Fundamental Theorem. Am Nat 128:761–764
Hadfield JD (2010) MCMC methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R package. J Stat Softw 33:1–22
Hankin DG, Nicholas W, Downey TW (1993) Evidence for inheritance of age of maturity in Chinook salmon. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50:347–358
Hankin DG, Fitzgibbons J, Chen Y (2009) Unnatural random mating policies select for younger age at maturity in hatchery Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) populations. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 66:1505–1521. https://doi.org/10.1139/F09-085
Hansen TF, Pélabon C, Houle D (2011) Heritability is not evolvability. Evol Biol 38:258–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-011-9127-6
Hard JJ (2004) Evolution of Chinook salmon life history under size-selective harvest. In: Hendry AP, Stearns SC (eds) Evolution illuminated: Salmon and their relatives. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 315–337
Hard JJ, Gross MR, Heino M, Synthesis et al (2008) Evolutionary consequences of fishing and their implications for salmon. Evol Appl 1:388–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4571.2008.00020.x
Heath DD, Fox CW, Heath JW (1999) Maternal effects on offspring size: variation through early development of Chinook salmon. Evolution 53:1605–1611
Heidelberger P, Welch PD (1983) Simulation run length control in the presence of an initial transient. Oper Res 31:1109–1144. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.31.6.1109
Heino M, Díaz Pauli B, Dieckmann U (2015) Fisheries-induced evolution. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 46:461–480. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-112414-054339
Henderson ACR (1975) Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model. Biometrics 31:423–447
Henderson CR (1984) Applications of linear models in animal breeding models. University of Guelph, Guelph
Hicks JF, Rachlow JL, Rhodes OE et al (2007) Reintroduction and genetic structure: Rocky Mountain elk in Yellowstone and the western states. J Mammol 88:129–138. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.95.2469.427-b
Hoffmann AA, Merilä J, Kristensen TN (2016) Heritability and evolvability of fitness and nonfitness traits: lessons from livestock. Evolution 70:1770–1779. https://doi.org/10.1111/evo.12992
Hughes A, Inouye BD, Johnson MTJ et al (2008) Ecological consequences of genetic diversity. Ecol Lett 11:609–623. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01179.x
Johnson MA, Friesen TA (2013) Age at maturity, fork length, and sex ratio of Upper Willamette River hatchery spring Chinook salmon. North Am J Fish Manag 33:318–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/02755947.2012.760503
Johnson MA, Friesen TA (2014) Genetic diversity and population structure of spring Chinook salmon from the Upper Willamette River, Oregon. North Am J Fish Manag 34:853–862. https://doi.org/10.1080/02755947.2014.920739
Jones OR, Wang J (2010) COLONY: a program for parentage and sibship inference from multilocus genotype data. Mol Ecol Resour 10:551–555. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02787.x
Kalinowski ST, Taper ML, Marshall TC (2007) Revising how the computer program CERVUS accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment. Mol Ecol 16:1099–1106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03089.x
Kendall NW, Hard JJ, Quinn TP (2009) Quantifying six decades of fishery selection for size and age at maturity in sockeye salmon. Evol Appl 2:523–536. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4571.2009.00086.x
Kettle C, Ennos R, Jaffré T et al (2008) Cryptic genetic bottlenecks during restoration of an endangered tropical conifer. Biol Conserv 141:1953–1961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.05.008
Kinnison MT, Quinn TP, Unwin MJ (2011) Correlated contemporary evolution of life history traits in New Zealand Chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha. Heredity 106:448–459. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2010.162
Kodama M, Hard JJ, Naish KA (2012) Temporal variation in selection on body length and date of return in a wild population of coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch. BMC Evol Biol 12:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-12-116
Kruuk LEB (2004) Estimating genetic parameters in natural populations using the “animal model”. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 359:873–890. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2003.1437
Kruuk LEB, Hadfield JD (2007) How to separate genetic and environmental causes of similarity between relatives. J Evol Biol 20:1890–1903. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2007.01377.x
Kruuk LEB, Clutton-Brock TH, Slate J et al (2000) Heritability of fitness in a wild mammal population. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:698–703. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.97.2.698
Kruuk LEB, Slate J, Wilson AJ (2008) New answers for old questions: the evolutionary quantitative genetics of wild animal populations. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39:525–548. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173542
Kuparinen A, Hutchings JA (2016) Genetic architecture of age at maturity can generate either directional or divergent and disruptive harvest-induced evolution. Philos Trans R Soc B 372:20160035. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0035
Le Luyer J, Laporte M, Beacham TD et al (2017) Parallel epigenetic modifications induced by hatchery rearing in a Pacific salmon. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 114:12964–12969. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711229114
Leberg PL (1993) Strategies for population reintroduction; effects of genetic variability on population growth and size. Conserv Biol 7:194–199
Lin JE, Hard JJ, Naish KA et al (2016) It’s a bear market: Evolutionary and ecological effects of predation on two wild sockeye salmon populations. Heredity 116:447–457. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2016.3
McClure M, Anderson J, Pess G et al (2018) Anadromous salmonid reintroductions: general planning for long-term viability and recovery
Morbey YE (2002) Protandry models and their application to salmon. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 13:337–343
Murphy AD, Goedert D, Morris MR (2014) Maternal effects are long-lasting and influence female offspring’s reproductive strategy in the swordtail fish Xiphophorus multilineatus. J Evol Biol 27:1613–1622. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeb.12414
O’Malley KG, Evans ML, Johnson MA et al (2015) Genetic parentage analysis of spring Chinook salmon on the South Santiam River. Technical report submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineeers. Portland, OR
Quinn TP, Unwin MJ, Kinnison MT (2000) Evolution of temporal isolation in the wild: genetic divergence in timing of migration and breeding by introduced Chinook salmon populations. Evolution 54:1372–1385
Quinn TP, Peterson J, Gallucci V et al (2002) Artificial selection and environmental change: countervailing factors affecting the timing of spawning by coho and Chinook salmon. Trans Am Fish Soc 131:591–598
Quinn TP, Hodgson S, Flynn L et al (2007) Directional selection by fisheries and the timing of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) migrations. Ecol Appl 17:731–739
Radwan J, Babik W (2012) The genomics of adaptation. Proc R Soc London Ser B 279:5024–5028. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.2322
Reed DH, Frankham R (2001) How closely correlated are molecular and quantitative measures of genetic variation? A meta-analysis. Evolution 55:1095–1103
Reed DH, Frankham R (2003) Correlation between fitness and genetic diversity. Conserv Biol 17:230–237
Reid JM, Arcese P, Sardell RJ, Keller LF (2011) Additive genetic variance, heritability, and inbreeding depression in male extra-pair reproductive success. Am Nat 177:177–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/657977
Roff DA, Mousseau TA (1987) Quantitative genetics and fitness: lessons from drosophila. Heredity 58:103–118. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1987.15
Sard NM, O’Malley KG, Jacobson DP et al (2015) Factors influencing spawner success in a spring Chinook salmon reintroduction program. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpendo.00061.2008
Sard NM, Johnson MA, Jacobson DP et al (2016) Genetic monitoring guides adaptive management of a migratory fish reintroduction program. Anim Conserv 19:570–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12278
Seamons TR, Bentzen P, Quinn TP (2004) The effects of adult length and arrival date on individual reproductive success in wild steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 204:193–204. https://doi.org/10.1139/F03-158
Seddon PJ, Armstrong DP, Maloney RF (2007) Developing the science of reintroduction biology. Conserv Biol 21:303–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00627.x
Shafer A, Wolf JBW, Alves PC et al (2015) Genomics and the challenging translation into conservation practice. Trends Ecol Evol 30:78–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.11.009
Stockwell CA, Mulvey M, Vinyard GL (1996) Translocations and the preservation of allelic diversity. Conserv Biol 10:1133–1141
Walsh B, Blows M (2009) Abundant genetic variation + strong selection = multiple genetic constraints: a geometric view of adaptation. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:41–59. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.l
Waples RS, Teel DJ, Myers JM, Marshall AR (2004) Life-history divergence in Chinook salmon: historic contingency and parallel evolution. Evolution 58:386–403
Whitlock M, McCauley D (1990) Some population genetic consequences of colony formation and extinction: genetic correlations within founding groups. Evolution 44:1717–1724
Williams JE, Sada DW, Williams CD (1988) American Fisheries Society guidelines for introductions of threatened and endangered fishes. Fisheries 13:5–11. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8446(1988)013
Williams R, Rhodes OE, Serfass TL (2000) Assessment of genetic variance among source and reintroduced fisher populations. J Mammol 81:895–907
Williamson KS, Murdoch AR, Pearsons TN et al. Can (2010) Factors influencing the relative fitness of hatchery and wild spring Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in the Wenatchee River, Washington, USA. J Fish Aquat Sci 67:1840–1851. https://doi.org/10.1139/F10-099
Wilson AJ, Réale D (2006) Ontogeny of additive and maternal genetic effects: lessons from domestic mammals. Am Nat 167:E23–E38
Wilson AJ, Réale D, Clements MN et al (2010) An ecologist’s guide to the animal model. J Anim Ecol 79:13–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01639.x
Zuur A, Ieno E, Walker N et al (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New York
Acknowledgements
Thanks to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the collection of tissue samples, arrival timing, and body length data on reintroduced spring-run Chinook salmon in the Upper Willamette River Basin. We also thank Dave Jacobson for his assistance with microsatellite genotyping on the earlier genetic pedigree study and Mike Ford, Jim Myers, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Evans, M.L., Hard, J.J., Black, A.N. et al. A quantitative genetic analysis of life-history traits and lifetime reproductive success in reintroduced Chinook salmon. Conserv Genet 20, 781–799 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-019-01174-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-019-01174-4