» Articles » PMID: 31417616

Population Correlates of Rapid Captive-induced Maladaptation in a Wild Fish

Overview
Journal Evol Appl
Specialty Biology
Date 2019 Aug 17
PMID 31417616
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Understanding the extent to which captivity generates maladaptation in wild species can inform species recovery programs and elucidate wild population responses to novel environmental change. Although rarely quantified, effective population size ( ) and genetic diversity should influence the magnitude of plastic and genetic changes manifested in captivity that reduce wild fitness. Sexually dimorphic traits might also mediate consequences of captivity. To evaluate these relationships, we generated >600 full- and half-sibling families from nine wild brook trout populations, reared them for one generation under common, captive environmental conditions and contrasted several fitness-related traits in wild versus captive lines. We found substantial variation in lifetime success (lifetime survival and reproductive success) and life history traits among wild populations after just one captive generation (fourteen- and threefold ranges across populations, respectively). Populations with lower heterozygosity showed lower captive lifetime success, suggesting that captivity generates maladaptation within one generation. Greater male-biased mortality in captivity occurred in populations having disproportionately higher growth rates in males than females. Wild population and allelic diversity had little or no influence on captive trait expression and lifetime success. Our results have four conservation implications: (i) Trait values and lifetime success were highly variable across populations following one generation of captivity. (ii) Maladaptation induced by captive breeding might be particularly intense for the very populations practitioners are most interested in conserving, such as those with low heterozygosity. (iii) Maladaptive sex differences in captivity might be associated with population-dependent growth costs of reproduction. (iv) Heterozygosity can be a good indicator of short-term, intraspecific responses to novel environmental change.

Citing Articles

How mariculture expansion is dewilding the ocean and its inhabitants.

Sellars L, Franks B Sci Adv. 2024; 10(42):eadn8943.

PMID: 39413184 PMC: 11482328. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adn8943.


Competitive interactions affect introgression and population viability amidst maladaptive hybridization.

Reed T, Kane A, McGinnity P, OSullivan R Evol Appl. 2024; 17(7):e13746.

PMID: 38957310 PMC: 11217556. DOI: 10.1111/eva.13746.


Selection among critically endangered landlocked salmon ( m. ) families in survival and growth traits across early life stages and in different environments.

Janhunen M, Eronen A, Kekalainen J, Primmer C, Donner I, Hyvarinen P Evol Appl. 2024; 17(4):e13692.

PMID: 38681511 PMC: 11052761. DOI: 10.1111/eva.13692.


The genetic consequences of captive breeding, environmental change and human exploitation in the endangered peninsular pronghorn.

Klimova A, Gutierrez-Rivera J, Sanchez-Sotomayor V, Hoffman J Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):11253.

PMID: 35788138 PMC: 9253347. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-14468-4.


Temporal analysis shows relaxed genetic erosion following improved stocking practices in a subarctic transnational brown trout population.

Klutsch C, Maduna S, Polikarpova N, Forfang K, Beddari B, Gjelland K Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):17396.

PMID: 34462480 PMC: 8405680. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96681-1.


References
1.
Belmar-Lucero S, Wood J, Scott S, Harbicht A, Hutchings J, Fraser D . Concurrent habitat and life history influences on effective/census population size ratios in stream-dwelling trout. Ecol Evol. 2012; 2(3):562-73. PMC: 3399145. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.196. View

2.
Naish K, Taylor 3rd J, Levin P, Quinn T, Winton J, Huppert D . An evaluation of the effects of conservation and fishery enhancement hatcheries on wild populations of salmon. Adv Mar Biol. 2007; 53:61-194. DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2881(07)53002-6. View

3.
Fraser D . How well can captive breeding programs conserve biodiversity? A review of salmonids. Evol Appl. 2015; 1(4):535-86. PMC: 3352391. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-4571.2008.00036.x. View

4.
Frankham R . Genetic adaptation to captivity in species conservation programs. Mol Ecol. 2008; 17(1):325-33. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03399.x. View

5.
Wood J, Belmar-Lucero S, Hutchings I, Fraser D . Relationship of habitat variability to population size in a stream fish. Ecol Appl. 2014; 24(5):1085-100. DOI: 10.1890/13-1647.1. View