iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: http://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29491937/
The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in fish swimming - PubMed Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Oct;62(5):475-488.
doi: 10.1093/cz/zow084. Epub 2016 Jul 24.

The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in fish swimming

Christopher E Oufiero  1 , Katrina R Whitlow  1
Affiliations

The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in fish swimming

Christopher E Oufiero et al. Curr Zool. 2016 Oct.

Abstract

Fish have a remarkable amount of variation in their swimming performance, from within species differences to diversity among major taxonomic groups. Fish swimming is a complex, integrative phenotype and has the ability to plastically respond to a myriad of environmental changes. The plasticity of fish swimming has been observed on whole-organismal traits such as burst speed or critical swimming speed, as well as underlying phenotypes such as muscle fiber types, kinematics, cardiovascular system, and neuronal processes. Whether the plastic responses of fish swimming are beneficial seems to depend on the environmental variable that is changing. For example, because of the effects of temperature on biochemical processes, alterations of fish swimming in response to temperature do not seem to be beneficial. In contrast, changes in fish swimming in response to variation in flow may benefit the fish to maintain position in the water column. In this paper, we examine how this plasticity in fish swimming might evolve, focusing on environmental variables that have received the most attention: temperature, habitat, dissolved oxygen, and carbon dioxide variation. Using examples from previous research, we highlight many of the ways fish swimming can plastically respond to environmental variation and discuss potential avenues of future research aimed at understanding how plasticity of fish swimming might evolve. We consider the direct and indirect effects of environmental variation on swimming performance, including changes in swimming kinematics and suborganismal traits thought to predict swimming performance. We also discuss the role of the evolution of plasticity in shaping macroevolutionary patterns of diversity in fish swimming.

Keywords: environmental variation; evolution; fish; phenotypic plasticity; swimming kinematics; swimming performance..

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Unifying principles of fish swimming. This visual depiction of fish swimming demonstrates the complex and integrative nature of fish swimming performance. Single headed arrows represent causal paths, providing hypotheses for the effect of fish design and kinematics on swimming performance and energetics. Double headed arrows represent correlational hypotheses among groups of traits. This depiction of fish swimming is based on previous representations of the relationship of morphology, performance, fitness, and ecology (Arnold 1983; Garland and Losos 1994; Irschick and Garland 2001; Oufiero and Garland 2007; Langerhans and Reznick 2010). Within each category there may be relations among traits, for example, trade-offs in performance, modularity in design, or correlation in ecology. Further details about the traits and their links are provided in the text.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The response and evolution of fish design/kinematics and swimming performance to environmental variation. Figure based on Futuyma (2013). Squares and warm colors represent swimming performance (red and solid lines) and fish design/kinematics (orange and dashed lines) in one population or species, circles and cool colors represent swimming performance (blue and solid lines), and fish design/kinematics (purple and dashed lines) in another population or species. On the x-axis is a hypothetical environmental variable that the swimming performance (right y-axis) and fish design/kinematics (left y-axis) may respond to. The curves located outside the L/R y-axes represent the distribution/plasticity of the respective response (design/performance) to the environment. If a population does not exhibit plasticity in relation to the environmental variable, its distribution for that character (fish design/kinematics or swimming performance) is represented by a dotted line. In (A) the two populations/species show differences in swimming performance, but no plasticity. Conversely each has a similar amount of plasticity in some underlying character. For example, no change in swimming performance in relation to hypoxia variation, but changes in the delivery of oxygen. This situation might arise if plasticity is not evolving, and fish design/kinematics are varying to maintain a constant swimming performance across environments. In (B) the two populations/species again differ in their performance ability and lack plasticity in relation to the environment. However, now there is a change in the amount of plasticity in underlying fish design/kinematics suggesting the two groups are evolving different plasticities. This might occur if one species has a bigger change in ventilation rate in response to hypoxia. In (C) there is again a difference in overall swimming performance fish design/kinematics between the groups, but now there is similar plasticity for all traits between the populations, suggesting that plasticity is not evolving. For example, two species living in seasonally hypoxic waters exhibiting a similar change in ventilation rate and swimming performance. Lastly (D) demonstrates the evolution of the plasticity in both fish design/kinematics and swimming performance between the two populations/species, while rarely tested in swimming performance of fish, this scenario could arise given different selective pressures for the populations or species of fish. These hypotheses can be used to examine how the plasticity of swimming performance and its underlying traits might evolve.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Models for the evolution of thermal performance curves of fish swimming. This figure represents potential hypotheses for the evolution of plasticity in response to the environment. They resemble thermal performance curves, but can be applied to other factors (e.g., DO). The x-axes represent the environmental variation, such as temperature, the y-axes represents the response trait, such as swimming performance. The dashed lines represent the maximal response. The different color lines represent changes in curves among populations or species. (A) Represents a single thermal performance curve, if all species or populations exhibit the same response to temperature. (B) Represents a shift in performance breadth (i.e., evolution of plasticity) in response to temperature, but no horizontal or vertical shift. In this case, the species are evolving to be more plastic, while maintaining the same optimal environment for performance. In (C) there is no difference in the breadth (i.e., plasticity is not evolving), but a vertical shift represents species performing better at the optimal condition. This might be seen in studies acclimating fish to low DO that outperform normoxic fish. In (D) there is a vertical shift of the performance at optimal environmental conditions and an evolution of the plasticity, with differences in performance breadth. In (E) there are no differences in performance breadth, but a horizontal shift where species/populations are shifting their performance optima to match local environmental conditions. In (F) there is a horizontal shift as well as the evolution of plasticity as the performance breadths change, but no change in maximum performance. In (G) there is no evolution of plasticity as the performance breadths are the same, but a horizontal shift in optima and a vertical shift in maximum performance, with an increase in maximal performance as the environment of populations or species changes. Lastly, in (H) there is a horizontal shift, evolution of plasticity, and change in maximum performance in response to environmental conditions. These performance curves have been highlighted elsewhere (Kingsolver et al. 2004; Angilletta 2009) and represent hypotheses for how swimming performance, fish design, and kinematics may respond to temperature variation. They could also represent responses to other environmental factors such as DO or carbon dioxide, but these have not been examined in detail in an evolutionary context.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Albertson RC, Streelman JT, Kocher TD, 2003. Genetic basis of adaptive shape differences in the cichlid head. J Hered 94:291–301. - PubMed
    1. Allan BJM, Domenici P, McCormick MI, Watson SA, Munday PL, 2013. Elevated CO2 affects predator–prey interactions through altered performance. PLoS ONE 8:e58520.. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Allan BJM, Miller GM, McCormick MI, Domenici P, Munday PL, 2014. Parental effects improve escape performance of juvenile reef fish in a high-CO2 world. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 281:20132179. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Allen PJ, Hodge B, Werner I, Cech JJ, Jr, 2006. Effects of ontogeny, season, and temperature on the swimming performance of juvenile green sturgeon Acipenser medirostris. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 63:1360–1369.
    1. Angilletta MJ, 2009. Thermal Adaptation: A Theoretical and Empirical Synthesis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

LinkOut - more resources