Fundulus Chrysotus) and Bluenose Shiners (Pteronotropis Welaka) Jacob A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School June 2019 Reproductive Parameters and Methodologies for the Culture of Golden Topminnows (Fundulus chrysotus) and Bluenose Shiners (Pteronotropis welaka) Jacob A. Fetterman Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Natural Resources and Conservation Commons Recommended Citation Fetterman, Jacob A., "Reproductive Parameters and Methodologies for the Culture of Golden Topminnows (Fundulus chrysotus) and Bluenose Shiners (Pteronotropis welaka)" (2019). LSU Master's Theses. 4941. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/4941 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. REPRODUCTIVE PARAMETERS AND METHODOLOGIES FOR THE CULTURE OF GOLDEN TOPMINNOWS (Fundulus chrysotus) AND BLUENOSE SHINERS (Pteronotropis welaka) A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The School of Renewable Natural Resources by Jacob Fetterman B.S., Lock Haven University, 2017 August 2019 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First, I would like to extend my gratitude to Dr. Christopher Green. My professional growth as a researcher here at LSU would not have possible without your mentorship. Your work ethic, leadership skills, and extensive aquaculture and fish physiology knowledge have been truly inspirational. Thank you for the effort you have put into my graduate education and development as a scientist. Without funding from the Southern Regional Aquaculture Center (United States Department of Agriculture) and the State Wildlife Grant Program (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries), this research would not have been possible. Thank you to my committee members, Dr. Kaller and Dr. Lutz. Your contributions to experimental design and data analysis were essential to the success of my studies, and for that I am grateful. I would also like to thank Cheryl Crowder for the preparation of histology slides that were an essential component to my research. Bob Baughman, a landowner in Angie, LA, was an invaluable resource, sharing his extensive knowledge of Ards Creek and permitting access to various sites on private property. Lastly, I must thank my loving family and friends for their support throughout this time. To my parents, thank you for always encouraging me to pursue my dreams, no matter where they might take me. I could not have done this without your support and great example. All my friends and colleagues have also played a greater role than they realize in this achievement. Thank you, Courtney Murr, Jade Betancourt, Connor Gilbert, Jeremy Reiman, Addison Monroe, and Nicholas Haddad, for your support with data collection, in the office, and outside of work hours. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................. ii LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... vi ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. viii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2. WEIGHT DEPENDENT INTRASPECIFIC VARIATION IN REPRODUCTIVE PARAMETERS OF FEMALE GOLDEN TOPMINNOWS .......................... 4 2.1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 4 2.2. Materials and methods ......................................................................................................... 7 2.3. Results ................................................................................................................................ 12 2.4. Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 16 CHAPTER 3. MORPHOLOGICAL AND GONADAL ASSESSMENTS FROM HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS OF BLUENOSE SHINERS ..................................................... 23 3.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 23 3.2. Materials and methods ....................................................................................................... 26 3.3. Results ................................................................................................................................ 30 3.4. Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 37 CHAPTER 4. ENVIRONMENTAL SIMULATION AND HORMONE INJECTIONS EMPLOYED IN BLUENOSE SHINER SPAWNING TRIALS ................................................. 42 4.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 42 4.2. Materials and methods ....................................................................................................... 45 4.3. Results ................................................................................................................................ 54 4.4. Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 58 CHAPTER 5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................... 64 APPENDIX. SUPPLEMENTAL TABLES ................................................................................. 69 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 76 VITA ............................................................................................................................................. 88 iii LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1. Mean ± SEM egg area (mm2), yolk volume (mm3), time to hatch (d), and percent survival to hatch for Golden Topminnow during a 6-week spawning period. Within columns, different letters denote statistically significant differences among female size classes for each embryo parameter (Ryan-Einot-Gabriel-Welsch Range Test, P ≤ 0.05). ..................................... 14 Table 2.2. Indoor recirculating system and outdoor mesocosm water quality parameters, represented by mean (x) ± SEM and range (R). ........................................................................... 16 Table 3.1. Morphometric characteristics of Bluenose Shiners measured to make comparisons between males and females from historical collections from sites in Louisiana and Mississippi. ................................................................................................................................... 27 Table 3.2. Oocyte stages, from Bluenose Shiner gonad histology slides as adapted from Brown-Peterson et al. (2011). No Stage V (atretic) oocytes were observed in the samples used for the current study. ............................................................................................................. 28 Table 3.3. MANOVA results comparing nine morphometric characteristics between male (n = 187) and female (n = 241) Bluenose Shiners, to assess sexual dimorphism. All comparisons were significant at an alpha level of 0.05. Overall, there was a statistically significant effect of sex on morphological expression (F9,418 = 54.84, P < 0.01). ................................................... 30 Table 4.1. Various methods and experimental setups employed to induce volitional spawning of Bluenose Shiners. ..................................................................................................................... 46 Table 4.2. Water temperature and conductivity of 38 L deionized water additions and 757 L recirculation system, used for simulating spates to induce spawning of Bluenose Shiners. ........ 50 Table 4.3. Weekly indoor recirculating aquaculture systems’ and Ards Creek (May 14, 2019) water quality parameters represented by mean (x) ± SEM and range (R). ................................... 53 Table 4.4. Mean ± SD, minimum, and maximum monthly water temperatures (°C) in outdoor mesocosms from July 10, 2018 – January 17, 2019, during outdoor spawning trials. ................. 56 Table 4.5. Ards Creek temperature and conductivity upon stream visits beginning February 8, 2018............................................................................................................................................... 57 Table 4.6. Ards Creek substrate size (mm) composition by site (Balltown Road and Old Columbia Road crossings). ........................................................................................................... 57 Table A.1. Mean ± SEM and range for morphometric measures of total length (TL), standard length (SL), head length (HL), max body depth (MBD), body depth at