1-Research Article Geometric Morphometric Comparison of Trout
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Iran. J. Ichthyol. (September 2017), 4(3): 220-230 Received: May 03, 2017 © 2017 Iranian Society of Ichthyology Accepted: June 27, 2017 P-ISSN: 2383-1561; E-ISSN: 2383-0964 doi: 10.7508/iji.2017 http://www.ijichthyol.org 1-Research Article Geometric morphometric comparison of trout barb, Capoeta trutta (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) in the Tigris River basin Yazdan KEIVANY* & Mohsen ARAB Department of Natural Resource (Fisheries Division), Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran *Email: [email protected] Abstract: A total of 136 specimens of trout barb, Capoeta trutta (Heckel, 1843) from eight rivers of the Tigris Basin were caught by seine net to compare their shape using geometric morphometrics. After anesthesia, using 1% clove oil solution, the specimens were fixed in 10% buffered formalin and transferred to the Ichthyology Museum of Isfahan University of Technology for further studies. The left sides of the specimens were photographed using a copy-stand equipped with a digital camera. To extract body shape data, 13 homologous landmark-points were digitized using tpsDig2 software. After GPA superimposing, the landmark data, were analyzed using Principal Components Analysis (PCA), Canonical Variate Analysis (CVA) and Cluster Analysis (CA) to explore the patterns of variation in their body shape. All multivariate analyses were computed using PAST software. The consensus configuration of populations was visualized using the wireframe graphs in MorphoJ to compare their shape difference. The PCA, CVA and CA showed differences among the populations, especially, between Konjancham and other populations. This result showed that geometric morphometric methods could separate trout barb populations of the Tigris River Basin from each other to a great extent. Potential factors contributing to the observed variations include differences in physicochemical parameters of rivers and geographic distance among the populations. However, for more details, molecular studies are needed. Key words: Cypriniformes, Geometry, Multivariate Analysis, Procrustes, Persian Gulf. Citation: Keivany, Y. & Arab, M. 2017. Geometric morphometric comparison of trout barb, Capoeta trutta (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) in the Tigris River basin. Iranian Journal of Ichthyology 4(3): 220-230. Introduction isolation can provide a crucial information on Identification and recognition of different the evolutionary trend of organisms particularly populations of a species is a basic requirement in rivers (Smith & Skulason 1996). River for management and conservation and contains almost half of the fish species (Froese exploitation of populations (Webb 1982). The & Pauly 2017). Two main factors for such a differences between populations of a single diversity are geographical isolation and species can indicate differences in habitat and diversity of the environmental conditions in behavioral characteristics, because fishes rivers (Nacua et al. 2010; Nelson et al. 2016). require to adapt to their environmental Rivers are highly variable in hydrological and conditions for better functioning of their biological features, which can affect the bio- biological systems (Webb 1982). Therefore, logical characteristics of the aquatic organisms. morphological adaptations to the environ- There are several ways to distinguish the mental conditions along with geographical populations, the geometric morphometric 220 Iranian Journal of Ichthyology (September 2017), 4(3): 220-230 method is a relatively modern method with (Heckel, 1870), inhabiting different rivers of many advantages, including being cost the Tigris River basin in Iran. Different effective, fast and useful (Bookstein 1997) and populations with a common origin may show has been used successfully in many studies different local adaptations due to environmental (Razavipour et al. 2013; Jalili et al. 2015; factors (Barlow & Munsey 1976). Therefore, Jamali-Ashtiani et al. 2015; Zamani & Eagderi the results of this study can provide important 2016; Moshayedi et al. 2016; Mouludi-Saleh et information on the evolutionary trend of this al. 2017; Banimasani et al. 2017). species. The trout barb (longspine scraper) is one of the important sport fishes in Iranian rivers and Material and Methods locally used for food. Although there are a few A total of 136 specimens of trout barb, Capoeta studies on the taxonomy and biology of this trutta, from the Tigris River tributaries (the species in Iran (Poria et al. 2012; Baboli et al. Persian Gulf), in Iran were collected in 2009- 2012; Taghavi Niya et al. 2015; Radkhah & 2011 using seine nets (Fig. 1). The specimens Nowferesti 2016; Keivany et al. 2016; Esmaeili were anesthetized in 1% clove oil and fixed in & Teimori 2016; Esmaeili et al. 2017), this is 10% formalin and transferred to the museum the first work on its body shape variation. This for further studies. The left sides of the study was aimed to compare the body shape of specimens were photographed using a copy- eight populations of trout barb, Capoeta trutta stand equipped with a digital camera. Fig. 1. Collection sites and number of specimens from each site in the Tigris River basin in parenthesis. 1. Sirvan (33), 2. Zimakan (10), 3. Deireh (11), 4. Karkheh (19), 5. Konjancham (21), 6. Doirej (14), 7. Eivan Abbasi (19), 8. Karun (18). 221 Iranian Journal of Ichthyology (September 2017), 4(3): 220-230 To extract body shape data, 13 homologous along with the specimens of Konjancham landmark-points were digitized using tpsDig2 population were located at negative part of the software (version 2.16) (Rohlf 1999). The PC1 axes showing a similar body pattern (Fig. landmark-points were selected at the specific 4). The specimens of this morph have a deeper points, in which a proper model of fish body body and a longer caudal peduncle. The second shape was extracted (Fig. 2). The landmark data morph type belonged to the specimens of the was submitted to a generalized procrustes other population, was positioned in the positive analysis (GPA) to remove non-shape data part of the PC1 axes. The members of this including scale, direction and position. Since morph type have a lower body depth, a shorter the sexes could not be recognized by caudal peduncle, a pectoral fin with a ventral appearance (Coad 2017); therefore, the data for position and snout and eye with a dorsal all specimens were pooled for all subsequent position. Comparison of the body shape of these analyses. The landmark data after GPA two populations using wireframe diagram superimposing were analyzed using Principal revealed that they differ in the body depth and Components Analysis (PCA), Canonical Variate the position of the snout (Fig. 5). Analysis (CVA) and Cluster Analysis (CA) to Doirej population differnciated from explore the patterns of variation in their body Konjancham and Deireh. In studying the body shape. All multivariate analysis were computed pattern changes, in positive direction of PC1, using PAST software (Hammer et al. 2001). the position of mouth (LM1), pectoral girdle The consensus configuration of populations (LM5,6) and dorsal fin (LM8,9) tend to change were visualized using the wireframe graphs in and head size to reduce (LM1,3-6). In positive MorphoJ 1.01 (Klingenberg 2011) to compare direction of PC2, the position of mouth (LM1) their shape differences. and pectoral girdle (LM5,6) tend to change and body hight to increase (LM8,9) (Fig. 4). Results Canonical variate analysis based on the p The paraposition of the landmarks was value calculated by permutation test indicated acceptable. The first four PC axes extracted significant differences among the populations from the variance-covariance matrix (PC1 = body shapes (Wilks lambda= 0.006, f= 5.93, 34.30%, PC2 = 19.15%, PC3 = 12.08% and p<0.00001). Konjancham, Doirej, Sirvan and PC4 = 7.57%) above the joliffe line (Fig. 3) of Zimakan populations were separated from each Principal components analysis, explained other. Also Karun, Karkheh and Deireh 73.10% of shape variations. Distribution of the populations were separated from each other to specimens in PCA graph showed the presence some extent (Fig. 5). of two morphological types in which first type Fig. 2. Landmarks used for the analysis on trout barb specimens. 22 2 Iranian Journal of Ichthyology (September 2017), 4(3): 220-230 Fig. 3. Results of scree plot of principal component analysis (PCA) and display of Joullife cut-off point (solid line) that represents the border of principal components (circles) significance. Fig. 4. Scatter plots of principal components scores for the group centroids of the studied populations. 1. Sirvan (33), 2. Zimakan (10), 3. Deireh (11), 4. Karkheh (19), 5. Konjancham (21), 6. Doirej (14), 7. Eivan Abbasi (19), 8. Karun (18). In studying the body pattern changes, in distances (Table 2 and 3) indicate the degree of positive direction of CV1, the size of the head differenciatios among the populations. The (LM1,3-6) tend to reduce and body height highest differnce is between Doirej- (LM8,9), caudal peduncle length (LM12,13) konjancham and Doirej-Eivan Abbasi. In CA of tend to increase. In positive direction of CV2, the populations, Copernic Coeficient was the head size (LM1,3-6) tend to increase and 0.7638. Based on CA, Konjancham population caudal peduncle length (LM12,13) tent to was the most highly differenciated population decrease and position of dorsal fin (LM8,9) (Fig. 7). changes (Fig. 6). Mahallanobis and Procrustes 22 3 Iranian Journal of Ichthyology (September 2017), 4(3): 220-230 Fig. 5. Wireframe graph showing the consensus body shape differences of trout barb in Tigris River basin. Fig. 6. Scatter plots of canonical scores for the group centroids of the studied populations of trout barb in the Tigris River basin. 1. Sirvan (33), 2. Zimakan (10), 3. Deireh (11), 4. Karkheh (19), 5. Konjancham (21), 6. Doirej (14), 7. Eivan Abbasi (19), 8. Karun (18). 22 4 Iranian Journal of Ichthyology (September 2017), 4(3): 220-230 Fig. 7. Wireframe graph showing the consensus body shape differences of trout barb in Tigris River basin. Table 1. Mahallanobis distance between different populations of trout barb in the Tigris River basin.