Age of maturation is influenced by both genetic (G) and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶

Oct 12, 2022 317 likes •606 views

Age of maturation is influenced by both genetic (G) and environmental (E) factors (G x E) Model for Annual Critical Periods when Growth Affects Onset of Maturation in Yearling Chinook Salmon Metabolic Onset of meiosis Onset of meiosis

SLIDE 1

Age of maturation is influenced by both genetic (G) and environmental (E) factors (G x E)

SLIDE 2

eyed-eggs alevin fry smolt

Critical period Age 2 maturation Onset of meiosis Age 2 maturation

S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M

Critical period Age 4 maturation Critical period Age 3 maturation Onset of meiosis Age 3 maturation

Model for Annual Critical Periods when Growth Affects Onset of Maturation in Yearling Chinook Salmon

Silverstein et al. 1998, CJFAS Shearer and Swanson 2000, Aquaculture Campbell et al. 2003, Biol. Repro. Larsen et al. 2004 TAFS Shearer et al. 2006 Aquaculture. Swanson et al. unpublished.

photoperiod

Metabolic Assessment

Adapted from P. Swanson

Spawning Age 2

mini nijack

Spawning Age 3

jack ck

SLIDE 3

Examples of the effect of hatchery culture (E) on age of maturation

Winter water temperature and age at maturity

in yearling summer Chinook

An “un-common garden” study with Hood

River spring Chinook

The effect of altering juvenile growth and

dietary fat on age at maturation in yearling Umatilla Fall Chinook

SLIDE 4

Upper Columbia River Yearling Summer Chinook salmon Example 1

SLIDE 5

Carlton Pond Chelan Falls Dryden Pond

Harsted et al. in prep

SLIDE 6

Age at return to Bonneville Dam of yearling summer Chinook salmon is strongly influenced by growth in the hatchery (bigger = earlier)

Harsted et al. in prep

SLIDE 7

Yearling Umatilla River URB Fall Chinook salmon Example 2

SLIDE 8

Birch Creek Meacham Creek McKay Dam

Oregon

McNary Dam

River River

Acclimation Bonneville Hatchery

Umat atilla H Hat atch chery

Upriver Bright stock harvest Program
Current Yearling Production = 900,000 smolts
Initial Rearing at Bonneville Hatchery, followed by 1

month acclimation period

D 9 n b d

SLIDE 9

Umatilla R. Fall Chinook Returns

SLIDE 10

Umatilla R. Fall Chinook Adults:

Minijack Jack

SLIDE 11

Design: 2 X 2 Factorial, 4 replicate years

High-High (STANDARD) Low-High High-Low Low-Low High Fat: 18% Bio-Clark Low Fat: 12% Rangen High Ration: 7 x week Low Ration: 4 x week

*All fish were put on Standard Feeding (High-High) at the beginning of December

FEEDING RATE DIET TYPE*

SLIDE 12

High Fat High Ration High Fat Low Ration Low Fat Low Ration Low Fat High Ration

After a year of differential rearing at Bonneville Hatchery

50 mm 100 mm 150 mm Standard

November 2011

SLIDE 13

Minijack Rates (among males)

High Fat, High Ration Low Fat, High Ration High Fat, Low Ration Low Fat, Low Ration 4 replicate years combined

SLIDE 14

20 40 60 80 100 120 MINIJACK JACK AGE 4 AGE 5

Returns / 10,000 Smolts

Brood Year 2010 Age At Return

High Fat, High Ration Low Fat, High Ration High Fat, Low Ration Low Fat, Low Ration

Date provided by Lance Clarke, ODFW

SLIDE 15

Total Adults by Experimental Group

(3,857 CWT Recoveries)

Adults / 10,000 Smolts 20 40 60 80 100 120

BY 2010

BY 2011 (only Age 4) High Fat, High Ration Low Fat, High Ration High Fat, Low Ration Low Fat, Low Ration

BY 2010 BY 2010 BY 2010 BY 2011 BY 2011 BY 2011 BY 2011

Date provided by Lance Clarke, ODFW

SLIDE 16

2002 -2009 Yearling Fall Chinook salmon Releases throughout the Columbia/Snake

10,996,006 fish released = Avg. 1,374,501/year
258,595 PIT-tags Implanted
6,478 PIT-tags detected in Bonneville Dam adult ladder

Passive integrated transponder tag = PIT tag

2.5% SAR

SLIDE 17

The Sub-yearling vs. Yearling rearing strategy PIT-tag returns to Bonneville

Yearling Sub-yearling

2.5% SAR 1% SAR 0.5% SAR

SLIDE 18

The larger the yearling fish at tagging (~ 12 mos.), the earlier the age at maturity *

SLIDE 19

Hood River, OR spring Chinook salmon Example 3

SLIDE 20

Carson Parkdale Pelton

One Stock-three very different hatchery facilities an “Uncommon garden” (same G different E)

SLIDE 21

SLIDE 22

a a b b a a October April

Growth rate and size at release varied among Hood River rearing groups

Spangenberg et al. 2014

SLIDE 23

Minijack rates before release varied 3-fold among rearing groups

Spangenberg et al. 2014

SLIDE 24

Adult age structure varied significantly among rearing groups

Age 5 Age 3 (jacks) Age 4 HR Car (N=50) HR Pelt (N=240) HR Park (N=49)

Data provided by Ryan Gerstenberger (CTWSR)

SLIDE 25

HR Pelton HR Parkdale HR Carson

BY 2010 BY 2009 BY 2008

SAR’s

SAR’s for HR Pelton was 2-5 fold higher than HR Parkdale and HR Carson

SLIDE 26

HR Pelton HR Parkdale HR Carson

BY 2008 BY 2009 BY 2010

SAR’s

Even when jacks are removed from the analysis, HR Pelton has 2-6 fold higher SAR’s than Parkdale and Pelton

SLIDE 27

Conclusions

Spawning is certainly not random and mating that more closely

approximates natural proportions seems reasonable

Using only large fish might reduce some genetic diversity that may

be important for a diverse life-history portfolio.

Don’t underestimate the environmental (E) effect in the GXE

equation affecting adult size and age-phenotypic plasticity

Big smolts that gain size in late fall-winter will likely mature earlier-

especially for males.

Each program must fine tune the calculus between sufficient size

for survival and undesirable shifts in age or return and SAR’s

It’s not the size at release that is most important, its how the fish

got there. The “wild fish template” may provide the best blue print