4.5 Article

Effects of genetic origin on phenotypic divergence in Brook Trout populations stocked with domestic fish

期刊

ECOSPHERE
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ecs2.3119

关键词

geometric morphometrics; otoliths; salmonids; stable isotopes; stocking

类别

资金

  1. Ressources Aquatiques Quebec (RAQ)
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phenotypic changes due to human activities are occurring at a far greater speed than those originating from natural causes in animal populations. For instance, phenotypic divergence among individuals may arise in populations supplemented with farm-reared fish that are known to display different phenotypes from those of wild individuals because of domestication. Little is known about how these phenotypic differences are maintained when domestic and wild individuals face the same environment and hybridize, as it is the case after supplementation. In this study, we assessed the effect of genetic origin of individuals on phenotypic trait divergence (morphology, growth, and size-at-age) in stocked populations of Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). We also evaluated whether genetic origin influences habitat use by documenting trophic niche and/or level using stable isotope analyses. We found significant effects of genetic origin on phenotypic variables with domestic fish generally being more fusiform and larger than wild and hybrid individuals. Lake identity also explained most of the variation in phenotypic variables, meaning that population-specific attributes were important drivers of morphology and size. Our results also showed that domestic fish were feeding in more littoral niches and at a higher trophic level than wild and hybrid individuals, suggesting that differences in feeding habits could partially explain phenotypic differences. These results highlight the importance of accounting for the genetic composition of populations when assessing the causes of phenotypic divergence in the wild.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据