Comparative study of aggressive behaviour in transgenic and wildtype zebrafish Danio rerio (Hamilton) and the flying barb Esomus danricus (Hamilton), and their susceptibility to predation by the snakehead Channa striatus (Bloch)

Italian Journal of Zoology

Volumn 77, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 102-109

  Jha, P ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH BENGAL   (India)

^b Raiganj Surendranath Mahavidyalaya ^*  (India)

Author keywords

Aggressive behaviour; Flying barb; Predation; Snakehead; Zebrafish

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CYPRINID; INTERSPECIFIC INTERACTION; INTRASPECIFIC INTERACTION; PERCIFORM; PREDATION;

CHANNA STRIATA; DANIO RERIO; ESOMUS;

EID: 77951168410     PISSN: 11250003     EISSN: 17485851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/11250000802629463     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Bams RA. 1967. Differences in performance of naturally and artificially propagated sockeye salmon migrant fry, as measured with swimming and predation tests. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 24:1117-1153.
2. Cortemeglia C, Beitinger TL. 2006. Susceptibility of transgenic and wildtype zebra danios, Danio rerio, to predation. Environmental Biology of Fishes 76:93-100.
3. Courtenay JWR, Taylor JN. 1986. Strategies for reducing risks from introductions of aquatic organisms: A philosophical perspective. Fisheries 11:30-33.
4. Coutant CC. 1973. Effect of thermal shock on vulnerability of juvenile salmonids to predation. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 30:965-973.
5. Devlin RH, Donaldson EM. 1992. Containment of genetically altered fish with emphasis on salmonids. In: Hew CL, Fletcher GL, editors. Transgenic fish. Singapore: World Science. pp. 229-265.
6. Duggan IC, Rixon CAM, MacIsaac HJ. 2006. Popularity and propagule pressure: Determinants of introduction and establishment of aquarium fish. Biological Invasions 8:377-382.
7. Engeszer RE, Patterson LB, Rao AA, Parichy DM. 2007. Zebrafish in the wild: A review of natural history and new notes from the field. Zebrafish 4:21-40.
8. Engeszer RE, Ryan MJ, Parichy DM. 2004. Learned social preference in zebrafish. Current Biology 14:881-884.
9. Ginetz RM, Larkin PA. 1973. Choice of colors of food items by rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 30:229-234.
10. Gomez-Laplaza LM. 2002. Social status and investigatory behaviour in the angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare). Behaviour 139:1469-1490.
11. Gong Z, Wan H, Tay TL, Wang H, Chen M, Yan T. 2003. Development of transgenic fish for ornamental and bioreactor by strong expression of fluorescent proteins in the skeletal muscle. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 308:58-63.
12. Gupta SP. 2000. Statistical methods. 28th ed. New Delhi: Sultan Chand and Sons. 1361 p.
13. Hauser L, Carvalho GR, Pitcher TJ. 1998. Genetic population structure in the Lake Tanganyika sardines Limnothrissa miodon. Journal of Fish Biology 53(Suppl. A):413-429.
14. Howe E, Howe C, Lim R, Burchett M. 1997. Impact of the introduced poeciliid Gambusia holbrooki (Girard, 1859) on the growth and reproduction of Pseudomugil signifer (Kner, 1865) in Australia. Marine and Freshwater Research 48:425-434.
15. Jayaram KC. 2004. The freshwater fishes of the Indian region. Delhi: Narendra Publishing House. 571 p.
16. Jha P, Jha S, Pal BC, Barat S. 2005. Behavioural responses of two popular ornamental carps, Cyprinus carpio L. and Carassius auratus (L.) to monoculture and polyculture conditions in aquaria. Acta Ichthyologica et Piscatoria 35:133-137.
17. Ju B, Chong SW, He J, Wang X, Xu Y, Wan H, Tong Y, Yan T, Korzh V, Gong Z. 2003. Recapitulation of fast skeletal muscle development in zebrafish by transgenic expression of GFP under the mylz2 promoter. Developmental Dynamics 227:14-26.
18. Kapoor D, Dayal R, Ponniah AG. 2002. Fish biodiversity of India. Lucknow: National Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources. 775 p.
19. Kapuscinski AR, Hallerman EM. 1991. Implications of introduction of transgenic fish into natural ecosystems. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48:99-107.
20. Korpi NL, Wisenden BD. 2001. Learned recognition of novel predator odour by zebra danios, Danio rerio, following time-shifted presentation of alarm cue and predator odour. Environmental Biology of Fishes 61:205-211.
21. Krause J, Godin JGJ. 1996. Influence of parasitism on shoal choice in banded killifish (Fundulus diaphanus, Teleostei, Cyprinodontidae). Ethology 102:40-49.
22. Landeau L, Terborgh J. 1986. Oddity and the 'confusion effect' in predation. Animal Behaviour 34:1372-1380.
23. Martin P, Bateson P. 1993. Measuring behaviour: An introductory guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 222 p.
24. Matthews M, Trevarrow B, Matthews J. 2002. A virtual tour of the guide for zebrafish users. Lab Animal 31:34-40.
25. McCann LI, Kohen DJ, Kline NJ. 1971. The effects of body size and body markings on nonpolarized schooling behavior of zebrafish (Brachydanio rerio). The Journal of Psychology 79:71-75.
26. McCarthy ID, Gair DJ, Houlihan DF. 1999. Feeding rank and dominance in Tilapia rendelii under defensible and indefensible patterns of food distribution. Journal of Fish Biology 55:854-867.
27. McClure MM, McIntyre PB, McCune AR. 2006. Notes on natural diet and habitat of eight danionin fishes, including the zebrafish, Danio rerio. Journal of Fish Biology 69:553-570.
28. McRobert SP, Bradner J. 1998. The influence of body coloration on shoaling preferences in fish. Animal Behaviour 56:611-615.
29. Muir WM, Howard RD. 1999. Possible ecological risks of transgenic organism release when transgenes affect mating success: sexual selection and the Trojan gene hypothesis. Proceedings of National Academy of Science 96:13853-13856.
30. Muir WM, Howard RD. 2002. Methods to assess ecological risks of transgenic fish releases. In: Letourneau DK, Burrows BE, editors. Genetically engineered organisms: Assessing environmental and human health effects. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 355-384.
31. Muir WM, Howard RD. 2004. Characterization of environmental risk of genetically engineered (GE) organisms and their potential to control exotic invasive species. Aquatic Sciences 66:414-420.
32. Pritchard VL, Lawrence J, Butlin RK, Krause J. 2001. Shoal choice in zebrafish, Danio rerio: The influence of shoal size and activity. Animal Behaviour 62:1085-1088.
33. Protosov VR. 1968. Vision and near orientation of fish. Jerusalem: Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Ltd. 175 p.
34. Pyron M. 2003. Female preferences and male-male interactions in zebrafish (Danio rerio). Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:122-125.
35. Reddy SR, Kote G. 1975. Predatory behavior of Gambusia affinis in relation to different light colors. Physiology and Behaviour 14:255-257.
36. Schneider MJ, Barraclough SA, Genoway RG, Wolford ML. 1980. Effects of phenol on predation of juvenile rainbow trout Salmo gairdneri. Environmental Pollution (Series A) 23:121-130.
37. Snekser JL, McRobert SP, Murphy CE, Clotfelter ED. 2006. Aggregation behavior in wildtype and transgenic zebrafish. Ethology 112:181-187.
38. Spence R, Fatema MK, Reichard M, Huq KA, Wahab MA, Ahmed ZF, Smith C. 2006. The distribution and habitat preferences of the zebrafish in Bangladesh. Journal of Fish Biology 69:1435-1448.
39. Spence R, Gerlach G, Lawrence C, Smith C. 2007. The behaviour and ecology of the zebrafish, Danio rerio. Biological Reviews 83:1-22.
40. Sterba G. 1962. Freshwater fishes of the world. London: Vista Books. 878 p.
41. Syarifuddin S, Kramer DL. 1996. The effect of group size on space use and aggression at a concentrated food source in blue gouramis, Trichogaster trichopterus (Pisces: Belontiidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes 46:289-296.
42. Talwar PK, Jhingran AG. 1991. Inland fishes of India and adjacent countries. Vols.1 & 2. New Delhi: Oxford and I.B.H. Publishing Company Ltd. 1158 p.
43. Tiedje JM, Colwell RK, Grossman YL, Hodson RE, Lenski RE, Mack RN, Regal PJ. 1989. The planned introduction of genetically engineered organisms: Ecological considerations and recommendations. Ecology 70:298-315.
44. Turnell ER, Mann KD, Rosenthal GG, Gerlach G. 2003. Mate choice in zebrafish (Danio rerio) analyzed with video-stimulus techniques. The Biological Bulletin 205:225-226.
45. Van Eenennaam AL, Olin PG. 2006. Careful risk assessment needed to evaluate transgenic fish. California Agriculture 60:126-131.
46. Warburton K, Madden C. 2003. Behavioural responses of two native Australian fish species (Melanotaenia duboulayi and Pseudomugil signifer) to introduced poeciliids (Gambusia holbrooki and Xiphophorus helleri) in controlled conditions. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 124:115-123.
47. Wright D, Nakamichi R, Krause J, Butlin RK. 2006. QTL analysis of behavioural and morphological differentiation between wild and laboratory zebrafish (Danio rerio). Behaviour Genetics 36:271-284.
48. Yap SY. 1988. Food resource utilization partitioning of fifteen fish species at Bukit Merah Reservoir, Malaysia. Hydrobiologia 157:143-160.
49. Zar JH. 1999. Biostatistical analysis. 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall International Incorporation. 931 p.