Comparative study of reproductive biology in single‐ and multiple‐spawner cyprinid fish. I. Morphological and histological features

Abstract

To clarify the dynamics and regulation of oogenesis in single-and multiple-spawning cyprinid fish with group-synchronous oocyte development, a multidisciplinary approach to their reproduction was undertaken using three species from the River Meuse (Belgium): the roach Rutilus rutilus as a single spawner, and the bleak Alburnus alburnus and the white bream Blicca bjoerkna as multiple spawners. The gonadosomatic index (GSI) and histomorphometric changes (distribution of oocyte size, relative proportion of the various oocyte stages) in the ovary are compared. Different patterns of GSI and oocyte growth were observed both between the single-and multiple-spawner fish and between the two multiple spawners. Maximum GSIs were higher in roach (21%) than in bleak and white bream (17·7 and 14·5%, respectively), and compared to the rapid decline of GSI in the roach population, the GSI of multiple spawners decreased progressively during the spawning season. In roach, a short gonadal quiescent period and an early onset of vitellogenesis was recorded from late summer onwards whereas, in bleak and white bream, exogenous vitellogenesis was not systematically observed before winter. A protracted spawning season and/or a low water temperature in autumn are hypothesized to explain this long period of gonadal quiescence. In bleak, during the spawning season, the oocytes recruited arose from the stock of endogenous vitellogenesis and attained the final maturation stage very rapidly. This recruitment occurred during the whole spawning season. In white bream, the differentiation of vitellogenic oocytes from smaller oocytes was completed before the onset of the spawning season. During the spawning period, the proportion of vitellogenic oocytes decreased progressively whereas the percentage of oocytes in the final maturation stage remained approximately constant. 1996 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles

Multiscale approach of fish responses to different types of environmental contaminations: A case study

“…For each section analyzed, 200 oocytes were scored and the proportion of oocytes at each stage of development was calculated according to the classification of Kestemont (1987) modified by Rinchard and Kestemont (1996) (Table 1). Only oocytes cut through the nucleus were considered in the present study.…”

“…ALP, as ortho-phosphate released from vitellogenin, was extracted from 30 μl of plasma according to Wallace and Jared (1968). Ortho-phosphates were determined through measurement of Table 1 Microscopic characteristics for the determination of the different oocyte stages (modified from Kestemont, 1987;Rinchard and Kestemont, 1996) Oocyte stage development Description …”

Croissance ovocytaire et régulation stéroïdienne chez les poissons à pontes unique et multiples : une revue

“…Comme pour l'ovogenèse, de nombreuses classifications, souvent arbitraires et directement influencées par l'espèce considérée, sont utilisées pour décrire le développement des ovaires (Macer 1974, Rinchard et al 1993, Barbieri et al 1994, Rinchard & Kestemont 1996. Néanmoins, en tenant compte des modalités de frai des poissons, il est possible de reconstituer la dynamique ovarienne des poissons ovipares.…”

“…2). Chez certaines espèces, comme la perche commune (Treasurer & Holliday 1981), la sole anglaise Pleuronectes vetulus Girard (Fargo & Tyler 1994) et le gardon Rutilus rutilus L. (Rinchard & Kestemont 1996), seulement deux populations ovocytaires sont présentes : l'une composée d'ovocytes protoplasmiques et l'autre d'ovocytes en cours de croissance synchrone. Par contre, chez d'autres espèces comme le barbeau Barbus barbus L. (Poncin 1988), trois classes d'ovocytes peuvent être distinguées dans l'ovaire un peu avant la période de ponte.…”

“…(de Vlaming 1983), différents modes de ponte ont été observés chez les poissons itéropares (de Vlaming 1983, Bye 1984, Weddle & Burr 1991, McEvoy & McEvoy 1992. Certains, comme la truite fario Salmo trutla fario L. (Billard 1987), la perche commune Perça fluviatilis L. (Treasurer & Holliday 1981), le doré jaune Stizostedion vitreum Mitchill (Malison et al 1994) et le hareng Clupea harengus L. (Blaxter & Holliday 1963) déposent leurs oeufs une seule fois durant leur saison de repro- (2) duction (pondeurs uniques); d'autres, comme le goujon Gobio gobio L. (Kestemont 1987(Kestemont et 1990, l'ablette Alburnus alburnus L. (Rinchard & Kestemont 1996), le turbot Scophthalmus maximus L. (Jones 1974) et la morue Gadus morhua L. (Kjesbu 1989) pondent à plusieurs reprises au cours d'une même saison de ponte (pondeurs multiples), d'autres encore présentent des pontes continues comme le tilapia Tilapia nilotica L. (Kestemont et al 1989) et le Characidae Roeboides guatemalensis Giinther (Kramer 1978). Enfin, certains ne se reproduisent que tous les 2 à 3 ans (pondeurs irréguliers) comme l'omble du Pacifique Salvelinus malma Walbaum (Armstrong & Morrow 1980).…”