Multispecies Hybridization among Native and Introduced Centrarchid Basses in Central Texas

Morizot, Donald C.; Calhoun, Stuart W.; Clepper, Lisa L.; Schmidt, Maureen E.; Williamson, J. Holt; Carmichael, Gary J.

doi:10.1577/1548-8659(1991)120<0283:mhanai>2.3.co;2

Cited by 39 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The ability to identify and precisely classify hybrid individuals through genetic analyses ultimately depends upon the number of diagnostic loci detected (Morizot et al . 1991).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic characterization of hybridization and introgression between anadromous rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki)

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interspecific hybridization represents a dynamic evolutionary phenomenon and major conservation problem in salmonid fishes. In this study we used amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLP) and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) markers to describe the extent and characterize the pattern of hybridization and introgression between coastal rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki). Hybrid individuals were initially identified using principle coordinate analysis of 133 polymorphic AFLP markers. Subsequent analysis using 23 diagnostic AFLP markers revealed the presence of F1, rainbow trout backcross, cutthroat trout backcross and later-generation hybrids. mtDNA analysis demonstrated equal numbers of F1 hybrids with rainbow and cutthroat trout mtDNA indicating reciprocal mating of the parental types. In contrast, rainbow and cutthroat trout backcross hybrids always exhibited the mtDNA from the recurrent parent, indicating a male hybrid mating with a pure female. This study illustrates the usefulness of the AFLP technique for generating large numbers of species diagnostic markers. The pattern of hybridization raises many questions concerning the existence and action of reproductive isolating mechanisms between these two species. Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that introgression between anadromous populations of coastal rainbow and coastal cutthroat trout is limited by an environment-dependent reduction in hybrid fitness.

show abstract

“…The ability to identify and precisely classify hybrid individuals through genetic analyses ultimately depends upon the number of diagnostic loci detected (Morizot et al . 1991).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic characterization of hybridization and introgression between anadromous rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki)

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Examples include extensive hybridization between native and nonnative black bass Micropterus spp. (Morizot et al 1991), pupfish (Cyprinodontidae; Echelle and Conner 1989), and most species and subspecies of salmonids (Krueger and May 1991;Leary et al 1995). Reproductive isolation is important in reducing hybridization in naturally sympatric populations of salmonids.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Timing and Location of Spawning by Nonnative Wild Rainbow Trout and Native Cutthroat Trout in the South Fork Snake River, Idaho, with Implications for Hybridization

Henderson

Kershner

Toline

2000

North American Journal of Fisheries Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our goal was to assess the likelihood of hybridization between introduced rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss and native Yellowstone (YS) cutthroat trout O. clarki bouvieri, based upon habitat use and temporal overlap during spawning. We used radio transmitters in 1996 and 1997 to describe the spawning behavior of rainbow trout, hybrids of rainbow trout and YS cutthroat trout, and YS cutthroat trout (1997 only). Fish displayed two distinct spawning strategies, either spawning in side channels of the main stem (9 rainbow trout, 14 hybrids, and 10 YS cutthroat trout) or in tributaries (5 rainbow trout, 3 hybrids, and 7 YS cutthroat trout). Within the main stem, the majority of rainbow trout and YS cutthroat trout migrated to the same 8‐km section to spawn, whereas hybrid trout spawned throughout the study site. The median spawning date for main‐stem‐spawning YS cutthroat trout (June 9) was significantly later than for rainbow trout (May 19) and hybrids (May 18). However, long spawning periods for rainbow trout (94 d), hybrids (113 d), and YS cutthroat trout (71 d) allowed for considerable overlap. The amount of spawning overlap varied among the four tributaries. In one tributary, complete spatial and some temporal overlap occurred (three rainbow trout, two hybrids, and two YS cutthroat trout); in another tributary no spatial or temporal overlap occurred (four rainbow trout and three YS cutthroat trout); and only YS cutthroat trout used the remaining two tributaries (one YS cutthroat trout in each). Molecular analyses verified that females of both rainbow trout and YS cutthroat trout were hybridizing and showed that the genetic composition of hybrid trout was more similar to rainbow trout than to YS cutthroat trout (mean = 64% rainbow trout markers). These results suggest that the majority of YS cutthroat trout (12 of 17) experience spatial and temporal overlap with rainbow trout and hybrids, but three tributaries may still provide some reproductive isolation for native fish.

show abstract

“…Some aspects of GB early life history (spawning season and location, fecundity, some nest and egg characteristics, and behavior) have been partially described by Hurst et al (1975), Boyer et al (1977), Edwards (1980), and Carmichael and Williamson (1986). Other published observations on GB have primarily focused on water quality tolerance (Edwards 1978(Edwards , 1980Tomasso and Carmichael 1986;Sullivan et al 2013;Matthews et al 2017), introgression with SMB (Edwards 1979(Edwards , 1980Whitmore and Butler 1982;Whitmore 1983;Garrett 1988Garrett , 1991Morizot et al 1991;Littrell et al 2007;Bean et al 2013;Bean and Grabowski 2015;Fleming et al 2015), habitat (Hubbs 1957;Edwards 1978Edwards , 1980Farquhar 1995;Perkin et al 2010;Bean and Grabowski 2015), phylogeny (Johnson et al 2001;Bagley et al 2011), and reproductive behavior (Lutz-Carrillo et al 2015). Studies of the GB diet are limited to observations of predominantly juvenile and adult fish (Edwards 1980;Day 1981;Carmichael and Williamson 1986;Farquhar 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…), introgression with SMB (Edwards , ; Whitmore and Butler ; Whitmore ; Garrett , ; Morizot et al. ; Littrell et al. ; Bean et al.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Early Life History of the Guadalupe Bass: Lessons for Culturing a Threatened Species

Prangnell

Matthews

2018

N American J Aquac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guadalupe Bass Micropterus treculii fingerlings are produced at the A. E. Wood State Fish Hatchery in San Marcos, Texas, and stocked into streams draining the Edwards Plateau in central Texas as part of a conservation program to restore threatened populations and combat hybridization with Smallmouth Bass M. dolomieu. Despite an intensive conservation effort, much of the early life history (including morphological development and first feeding characteristics) required for the intensive production of Guadalupe Bass is unreported in the mainstream literature. A better understanding of this critical period may improve culture practices, fingerling production, and management efforts. We documented spawning and early developmental characteristics and milestones over a temperature range of 20–24°C and the prey composition of Guadalupe Bass in a hatchery setting. Eggs and fry were photographed under a microscope and observed in culture tanks and ponds from initial stocking to fingerling harvest. A dominant‐male, polygynous spawning structure was confirmed. Egg incubation (28–29 growing degree‐days), larval development, yolk depletion, swim‐up, and life stage transition proceeded faster at higher temperature. Eggs (mean diameter, 2.1 mm), fry (mean hatchling TL, 4.7 mm), and yolk reserves (mean hatchling yolk volume, 2.02 μL) were larger than reported for Largemouth Bass M. salmoides. Normally developed fry commenced exogenous feeding on a variety of zooplankton soon after swim‐up (120–144 h posthatch and 6.95–8.05 mm TL at 23.4°C), while yolk was still present, and consumed progressively larger aquatic invertebrates over time. Swim‐up fry with a range in gape width of 0.75–0.89 mm readily consumed brine shrimp Artemia spp. nauplii as first feed. Guadalupe Bass appear to be a relatively pliable species, and current culture practices are generally sound. The observations presented can be used to refine culture and management practices.

show abstract

Multispecies Hybridization among Native and Introduced Centrarchid Basses in Central Texas

Cited by 39 publications

References 7 publications

Genetic characterization of hybridization and introgression between anadromous rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki)

Genetic characterization of hybridization and introgression between anadromous rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki)

Timing and Location of Spawning by Nonnative Wild Rainbow Trout and Native Cutthroat Trout in the South Fork Snake River, Idaho, with Implications for Hybridization

The Early Life History of the Guadalupe Bass: Lessons for Culturing a Threatened Species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About