F | 211152 | 157 | Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Behavior assays | BEHAVIOR TRIALS
One way to learn what traits might be under selection in hatcheries is to raise families to measure their growth, and then measure various physiological and behavioral traits on their siblings. Then one can determine if among-family variation in any of those traits correlates with performance in the hatchery. Any traits that show such a correlation are likely under selection because larger smolts at release have a higher probability of survival at sea. We also predict that offspring of HxH crosses would differ from offspring of WxW crosses in the same traits, and in the predicted direction (e.g. if within a fish type (HxH vs. WxW), bolder families perform best in the hatchery, then we expect HxH families to be bolder, on average, than WxW families).
To date we have shown via behavior trials that steelhead families scored as more dominant also grew slightly faster in the main tanks (Thompson and Blouin, 2016). We also observed that preference for being high or low in the water column, and quickness to feed at the surface, showed strong family effects in preliminary experiments (unpub. data). We will test whether variation in these traits predicts variation among families in growth rate.
Traits such as quickness to feed, and propensity to be near the surface can all be manifestations of variation in general fearfulness/anxiety, which has been well characterized in fish as the shyness/boldness behavioral syndrome (Conrad et al., 2011). Reduced anxiety/fearfulness is an almost universal outcome of domestication in vertebrates (Price, 2002), and it has been suggested that the high-food, high-density, predator-free environment of a hatchery selects for generalized boldness (Huntingford, 2004; Sundström et al., 2004; Huntingford & Adams, 2005; Salonen & Peuhkuri, 2006). Such selection could then explain the reduced reproductive success of hatchery fish in the wild, as the boldness that served them well in captivity becomes a liability for their offspring in the low-food, predator-filled wild environment (Biro et al., 2004, 2007). For example, several studies showed domesticated salmon stocks feed more readily, and are more susceptible to, or less fearful of, predators than wild stocks (e.g. Johnsson and Abrahams, 1991; Biro et al., 2004; Huntingford, 2004; Houde et al., 2010; Jackson and Brown, 2011). Hatchery masu salmon also showed greater propensity to feed near the surface (Reinhardt, 2001), in addition to reduced fear of predators and greater feeding rates (Yamamoto and Reinhardt, 2003) than wild stocks. Such behavioral change is not limited to salmonids. Domesticated zebrafish showed a higher degree of surface orientation, a reduced startle response, and higher growth rate in the lab than wild zebrafish (Robison and Rowland, 2011). It was also shown that zebrafish selected for swimming at the front of the tank (nearest to the observer) also swam higher in the water column, and fed more quickly as a correlated response to selection (Oswald et al., 2013). So there appears to be a suite of genetically correlated traits in fish, including surface orientation, that all change together in response to selection for any one of them. Other vertebrates deliberately selected for reduced fear of humans also show correlated responses in a variety of other behavioral and physiological traits, similar to what is observed in fish (e.g. foxes: Trut et al., 2009; wild jungle fowl: Agnvall et al., 2015). So what we are observing in steelhead may be a very general phenomenon in vertebrates. Studying the extent to which steelhead hatcheries select for particular behaviors (especially along the boldness/shyness axis), and how that might affect the survival of their offspring in the wild, is now the main focus of our work.
For this year (summer 2020) we plan to follow up on preliminary studies we did in the summers of 2018 and 2019. We plan to set up 10-20 full-sib families of steehead in replicate tanks to measure their growth, as done previously for other experiment s (e.g Thompson and Blouin 2016; Thompson and Blouin, 2015). The number of families we can use, and their source, will depend on availability of broodstock from our collaborating hatcheries (Trask hatchery for the Wilson River stock, Alsea hatchery for the Siletz stock). If they have enough eggs for their production goals and can spare extra, we will include wild broodstock (WxW). If not, we will use F1 fish (we assume there will still be genetic variation for the traits of interest, even if the fish have been through one generation of selection. There is certainly plenty of variation among families in growth rate). Ideally, we would be able to use 10 WxW pairs and 10 HxH pairs and also compare the two types of fish, but the final availability of W and H fish is hard to predict. If we can get enough eggs from the hatchery, we will also put siblings of the experimental fish into the artificial streams at the OHRC to see if family boldness is negatively correlated with growth and/or survival in a “wild” environment. This experiment depends on the streams being available in 2020, which may not be the case if proposed modifications to the dam upstream of the facility come to pass.
For each family, we will conduct a series of behavioral tests to measure various correlates of generalized boldness. The first is propensity to feed at the surface in the days after yolk absorption. Here we set up groups of 15 fry per family, in triplicate, and each time they are fed we count the number of nose-pokes to the surface in a 2 minute period. In 2018 we set up a preliminary test of this trait, and found striking variation among families – some readily feed at the surface en masse, while some families linger at the bottom and wait for food to fall. We are currently replicating that experiment. We are also assaying several aspects of boldness (e.g. aggression towards other fish, position in water column, quickness to feed) on individually-marked fish in mixed-family groups. Here we are using twelve glass tanks in which we have mixed-family groups consisting of one fish per family. All fish in each tank are individually marked with fluorescent tags, and we are quantifying the behavior of each individual fish during feeding in order to get family averages across the 12 tanks. We will repeat this experiment in summer of 2020. From these data we will determine if surface feeding by each family as assayed in single-family groups predicts what one sees in mixed-family groups. We will also see if any combination of behaviors we can quantify on each family in the mixed-family behavior tanks predicts the performance (growth) of their siblings in the large grow-out tanks.
REFERENCES
Agnvall B, Katajamaa R, Altimiras J, and Jensen P. 2015. Is domestication driven by reduced fear of humans? Boldness, metabolism and serotonin levels in divergently selected red junglefowl (Gallus gallus). Biol Letters 11(9):20150509.
Biro PA, Abrahams MV, and Post JR. 2007. Direct manipulation of behaviour reveals a mechanism for variation in growth and mortality among prey populations. Animal Behaviour 73(5):891-896.
Biro, PA, MV Abrahams, JR Post and EA Parkinson. 2004. Predators select against high growth rates and risk-taking behaviour in domestic trout populations. Proceedings: Biological Sciences 271:1554-2233
Conrad JL, Weinersmith KL, Brodin T, Saltz JB, and Sih A. 2011. Behavioural syndromes in fishes: a review with implications for ecology and fisheries management. Journal of Fish Biology 78(2):395-435.
Houde ALS, Fraser DJ, and Hutchings JA. 2010. Reduced anti-predator responses in multi-generational hybrids of farmed and wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.). Conserv Genet 11(3):785-794.
Huntingford FA. 2004. Implications of domestication and rearing conditions for the behaviour of cultivated fishes. Journal of Fish Biology 65(s1):122-142.
Huntingford F, and Adams C. 2005. Behavioural syndromes in farmed fish: implications for production and welfare. Behaviour 142(9-10):1207-1221.
Jackson CD, and Brown GE. 2011. Differences in antipredator behaviour between wild and hatchery-reared juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) under seminatural conditions. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 68(12):2157-2166.
Johnsson JI, and Abrahams MV. 1991. Interbreeding with Domestic Strain Increases Foraging under Threat of Predation in Juvenile Steelhead Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): An Experimental Study. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 48(2):243-247.
Oswald ME, Singer M, and Robison BD. 2013. The Quantitative Genetic Architecture of the Bold-Shy Continuum in Zebrafish, Danio rerio. PLoS ONE 8(7):e68828.
Price EO. 2002. Animal Domestication and Behavior. New York: CABI Publishing. 297 p.
Reinhardt UG. 2001. Selection for Surface Feeding in Farmed and Sea-Ranched Masu Salmon Juveniles. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 130(1):155-158.
Robison BD, and Rowland W. 2005. A potential model system for studying the genetics of domestication: behavioral variation among wild and domesticated strains of zebra danio (Danio rerio). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 62(9):2046-2054.
Salonen A, and Peuhkuri N. 2006. The effect of captive breeding on aggressive behaviour of European grayling, Thymallus thymallus, in different contexts. Animal Behaviour 72(4):819-825.
Sundström LF, Petersson E, Höjesjö J, Johnsson JI, and Järvi T. 2004. Hatchery selection promotes boldness in newly hatched brown trout (Salmo trutta): implications for dominance. Behavioral Ecology 15(2):192-198.
Thompson, NF and MS Blouin 2015 The effects of high rearing density on the potential for domestication selection in hatchery culture of steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 72:1-6.
Thompson NF, Blouin MS. 2016. Family dominance level measured during the fry stage weakly influences family length at smolting in hatchery reared steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 145: 1282-1289.
Trut L, Oskina I, and Kharlamova A. 2009. Animal evolution during domestication: the domesticated fox as a model. Bioessays 31(3):349-360.
Yamamoto T, and Reinhardt UG. 2003. Dominance and predator avoidance in domestic and wild masu salmon Oncorhynchus masou. Fisheries Science 69:88-94. | $80,000 | 45.71% | 11/01/2019 | 10/31/2020 |