Genetic and maternal effects on juvenile survival and fitness-related traits in three populations of Atlantic salmon

Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences

Volumn 72, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 751-758

  Houde, Aimee Lee S ^a   Black, Craig A ^b   Wilson, Chris C ^c   Pitcher, Trevor E ^b,d   Neff, Bryan D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

^c TRENT UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SALMO SALAR;

EID: 84928535828     PISSN: 0706652X     EISSN: 12057533     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/cjfas-2014-0472     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Agbali, M., Reichard, M., Bryjová, A., Bryja, J., and Smith, C. 2010. Mate choice for nonadditive genetic benefits correlate with MHC dissimilarity in the rose bitterling (Rhodeus ocellatus). Evolution, 64(6): 1683-1696. doi:10.1111/j.1558- 5646.2010.00961.x. PMID:20148959.
2. Anttila, K., Couturier, C.S., Overli, O., Johnsen, A., Marthinsen, G., Nilsson, G.E., and Farrell, A.P. 2014. Atlantic salmon show capability for cardiac acclima- tion to warm temperatures. Nat. Commun. 5: 4252. doi:10.1038/ncomms5252. PMID:24957572.
3. Araki, H., Cooper, B., and Blouin, M.S. 2007. Genetic effects of captive breeding cause a rapid, cumulative fitness decline in the wild. Science, 318(5847): 100-103. doi:10.1126/science.1145621. PMID:17916734.
4. Berg, O.K., Hendry, A.P., Svendsen, B., Bech, C., Arnekleiv, J.V., and Lohrmann, A. 2001. Maternal provisioning of offspring and the use of those resources during ontogeny: Variation within and between Atlantic salmon families. Funct. Ecol. 15(1): 13-23. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2435.2001.00473.x.
5. Bernardo, J. 1996. Maternal effects in animal ecology. Am. Zool. 36(2): 83-105. doi:10.1093/icb/36.2.83.
6. Burnham, K.P., and Anderson, D.R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, New York.
7. Carson, H.L. 1990. Increased genetic variance after a population bottleneck. Trends Ecol. Evol. 5(7): 228-230. doi:10.1016/0169-5347(90)90137-3. PMID: 21232361.
8. Cheverud, J.M., Rutledge, J.J., and Atchley, W.R. 1983. Quantitative genetics of development: genetic correlations among age-specific trait values and the evolution of ontogeny. Evolution, 37(5): 895-905. doi:10.2307/2408405.
9. Consuegra, S., and Garcia de Leaniz, C. 2008. MHC-mediated mate choice increases parasite resistance in salmon. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 275(1641): 1397-1403. doi:10.1098/rspb.2008.0066.
10. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2006. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Atlantic salmon Salmo salar (Lake Ontario population) in Canada. Committee in the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa, Ont.
11. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2010. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Atlantic salmon Salmo salar (anadromous form) in Canada.
12. Crawford, S.S. 2001. Salmonine introductions to the Laurentian Great Lakes: an historical review and evaluation of ecological effects. Can. Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci. No. 132.
13. Crnokrak, P., and Roff, D.A. 1995. Dominance variance: associations with selection and fitness. Heredity, 75(5): 530-540. doi:10.1038/hdy.1995.169.
14. Dimond, P., and Smitka, J. 2005. Evaluation of selected strains of Atlantic salmon as potential candidates for the restoration of Lake Ontario. Trout Unlimited Can. Tech. Rep. No. ON-012.
15. Evans, M.L., and Neff, B.D. 2009. Non-additive genetic effects contribute to larval spinal deformity in two populations of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Aquaculture, 296(1-2): 169-173. doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2009. 08.018.
16. Evans, M.L., Neff, B.D., and Heath, D.D. 2010. Quantitative genetic and translocation experiments reveal genotype-by-environment effects on juvenile life-history traits in two populations of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). J. Evol. Biol. 23(4): 687-698. doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.01934.x. PMID:20102438.
17. Falconer, D.S., and Mackay, T.F.C. 1996. Introduction to quantitative genetics.
18. Longman, Harlow. Fraser, D.J. 2008. How well can captive breeding programs conserve biodiversity? A review of salmonids. Evol. Appl. 1(4): 535-586. doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571. 2008.00036.x.
19. Green, B.S. 2008. Maternal effects in fish populations. Adv. Mar. Biol. 54: 1-105. doi:10.1016/S0065-2881(08)00001-1. PMID:18929063.
20. Houde, A.L.S., Wilson, C.C., and Neff, B.D. 2013. Genetic architecture of survival and fitness-related traits in two populations of Atlantic salmon. Heredity, 111(6): 513-519. doi:10.1038/hdy.2013.74. PMID:23942281.
21. Koskinen, M.T., Haugen, T.O., and Primmer, C.R. 2002. Contemporary fisherian life-history evolution in small salmonid populations. Nature, 419(6909): 826- 830. doi:10.1038/nature01029. PMID:12397355.
22. Kruuk, L.E.B., Slate, J., and Wilson, A.J. 2008. New answers for old questions: the evolutionary quantitative genetics of wild animal populations. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 39: 525-548. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173542.
23. Lindholm, A.K., Hunt, J., and Brooks, R. 2006. Where do all the maternal effects go? Variation in offspring body size through ontogeny in the live-bearing fish Poecilia parae. Biol. Lett. 2(4): 586-589. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2006.0546.
24. Lynch, C.B. 1994. Evolutionary inferences from genetic analysis of cold adaptation in laboratory and wild populations of the house mouse, Mus domesticus. In Quantitative genetic studies of behavioral evolution. Edited by C.R.B. Boake. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill., USA.
25. Lynch, M., and Walsh, B. 1998. Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass., USA.
26. Metcalfe, N.B., and Thorpe, J.E. 1992. Early predictors of life history events: the link between first feeding date, dominance and seaward migration in Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar. J. Fish Biol. 41(Suppl. B): 93-99. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649. 1992.tb03871.x.
27. Mousseau, T.A., and Fox, C.W. 1998. The adaptive significance of maternal effects. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13(10): 403-407. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01472-4. PMID:21238360.
28. Neff, B.D., and Pitcher, T.E. 2005. Genetic quality and sexual selection: An integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Mol. Ecol. 14(1): 19-38. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02395.x. PMID:15643948.
29. Neff, B.D., and Pitcher, T.E. 2008. Mate choice for non-additive genetic benefits: a resolution to the lek paradox. J. Theor. Biol. 254(1): 147-155. doi:10.1016/j. jtbi.2008.05.019. PMID:18589454.
30. Neff, B.D., Garner, S.R., and Pitcher, T.E. 2011. Conservation and enhancement of wild fish populations: preserving genetic quality versus genetic diversity. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 68(6): 1139-1154. doi:10.1139/F2011-029.
31. Pakkasmaa, S., Peuhkuri, N., Laurila, A., Hirvonen, H., and Ranta, E. 2001. Female and male contribution to egg size in salmonids. Evol. Ecol. 15(2): 143-153. doi:10.1023/A:1013873810905.
32. Pitcher, T.E., and Neff, B.D. 2006. MHC class IIB alleles contribute to both additive and nonadditive genetic effects on survival in Chinook salmon Mol. Ecol. 15(9): 2357-2365. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02942.x.
33. Pitcher, T.E., and Neff, B.D. 2007. Genetic quality and offspring performance in Chinook salmon: implications for supportive breeding. Conserv. Genet. 8(3): 607-616. doi:10.1007/s10592-006-9204-z.
34. Puurtinen, M., Ketola, T., and Kotiaho, J.S. 2009. The good-genes and compatiblegenes benefits of mate choice. Am. Nat. 174(5): 741-752. doi:10.1086/606024. PMID:19772439.
35. Räsänen, K., and Kruuk, L.E.B. 2007. Maternal effects and evolution at ecological time-scales. Funct. Ecol. 21(3): 408-421. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2435.2007.01246.x.
36. Roff, D.A., and Emerson, K. 2006. Epistasis and dominance: evidence for differential effects in life-history versus morphological traits. Evolution, 60(10): 1981-1990. doi:10.1554/06-165.1. PMID:17133855.
37. Saccheri, I., Kuussaari, M., Kankare, M., Vikman, P., Fortelius, W., and Hanski, I. 1998. Inbreeding and extinction in a butterfly metapopulation. Nature, 392(6675): 491-494. doi:10.1038/33136.
38. Waldmann, P. 2001. Additive and non-additive genetic architecture of two different-sized populations of Scabiosa canescens. Heredity, 86(6): 648-657. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2540.2001.00873.x. PMID:11595045.
39. Wedekind, C., Müller, R., and Spicher, H. 2001. Potential genetic benefits of mate selection in whitefish. J. Evol. Biol. 14(6): 980-986. doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101. 2001.00349.x.
40. Wedekind, C., Evanno, G., Urbach, D., Jacob, A., and Müller, R. 2008. 'Goodgenes' and 'compatible-genes' effects in an alpine whitefish and the information content of breeding tubercles over the course of the spawning season. Genetica, 134(1): 21-30. doi:10.1007/s10709-008-9251-0.
41. Wilson, A.J., and Réale, D. 2006. Ontogeny of additive and maternal genetic effects: lessons from domestic mammals. Am. Nat. 167(1): E23-E38. doi:10. 1086/498138. PMID:16475094.
42. Wilson, A.J., Coltman, D.W., Pemberton, J.M., Pemberton, J.M., Byrne, K.A., and Kruuk, L.E.B. 2005. Maternal genetic effects set the potential for evolution in a free-living vertebrate population. J. Evol. Biol. 18(2): 405-414. doi:10.1111/j. 1420-9101.2004.00824.x. PMID:15715846.