Morphological Constraints on Life History Evolution in Poecilia Reticulata (Cyprinodontiformes: Poeciliinae)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Theses Digitization Project John M. Pfau Library 1999 Morphological constraints on life history evolution in Poecilia reticulata (Cyprinodontiformes: poeciliinae) Edmund Richard Miranda Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project Part of the Cell and Developmental Biology Commons Recommended Citation Miranda, Edmund Richard, "Morphological constraints on life history evolution in Poecilia reticulata (Cyprinodontiformes: poeciliinae)" (1999). Theses Digitization Project. 1722. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/1722 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the John M. Pfau Library at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses Digitization Project by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MORPHOLOGICAL: CONSTRAINTS ON LIFE HISTORY EVOLUTION IN POECILIA RETICULATA (CYPRINODONTIFORMES:.POECILIINAE) A Thesis Presen.te:d to the h Faculty of Califorhia State University, ;,SEn Bernardino In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirments for the Degree Master of Science in . Biology Edmund Richard Miranda Jr. December 1999 MORPHOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS ON LIFE HISTORY EVOLUTION IN POECILIA RETICULATA (CYPRINODONTIFORMES POECILIINAE) A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of . California State University, San Bernardino by Edmund Richard Miranda Jr. December 1999 Approved by: w-n Dr. David M. Polcyn, Chair, Biology Date Dr. Stuart Sumida Dr. jJaW^s Ferrari Dr. David Reznick ABSTRACT Four streams locales, from two predation regimes of the guppy, Poeclia reticulata (Cyprinodontiformes: Poeciliinae), were studied to characterize life history traits and empiricaly evaluate the potential for gut/intestine and reproductive clutch trade offs. Life- history characteristics matched previously reported values from south slope of the Northern Range on the Island of Trinidad. Guppies from high predation locales had a higher reproductive allotment, more offspring per clutch, and offspring of lesser weight as compared to low predation locales. Whole body volumes of guppies showed no differences among locales or predation regimes, which suggests that the higher reproductive alldtments seen in high predation locale fish may be a result of an internal trade-off of the gut/intestine by reproductive structures. Gut lengths were shorter for high predation regimes. This difference in gut length may correlate to volume. If so, the results suggest that high predation fish may indeed be trading gut mass/volume for larger clutch sizes. It appears that fish from high pre4^atibn locales are lighter in weight compared to low predation fish. These results 111 suggest that high.:rep allotments may.,be facilitated for fish from high predation locales by (1) trading caudal peduncle mass for reproductive clutches and (2) shorter gut lengths may free up space within the ' coelomic cavity for higher reproductive allotments. Further evaluation of this possible trade-off by use of more refined bechniqueS/ or- utilizing mass as a surrogate for volume, would be needed to further explore these findings. IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are so many people I wish to thank, for without them I. would have never made it through or finished this project. I would like to, start with my committee members: Dr. David Polcyn, for always having great ideas for data presentation and just being a friend; Dr. Stuart Sumida for his help with structural and functional morphology; and Dr. James Ferrari for making sure I remember where and why current scientific thinking developed. I would also like to thank Graduate Division for their continued help with all the paper work and their financial support. I would also like to thank Dr. Michael Loik for all his support, field trips, mentorship, and for just being a friend. Lastly, I would like to say thank all the biology graduates students, especially Travis Huxman and Kyle Hubbard. I would like to thank the graduate students, faculty and staff at University of California, Riverside Department of Biology for all of their support and help during this project. Jason Odell, thanks for the years of being a friend and the trip to Trinidad. My sincere thanks to Dr. David N. Reznick for his on-going support with my work. As for the rest of the "Reznick lab", I could not have done it without you. Ken Halama, thanks for just "goon'n" out and being enthused with science. Gita Kolluru, thanks for the yearS' of friehdship' Q-hd' being a great houseinate, (and : staying up all night to guard the house while the rest of us slept, hahaha). Farrah Bashey, thanks for being so critical and asking questions about my work. Mike Bryant, wow, what can I say? I thank Mike for being a great friend and all the rest of his help and support is just icing on a great friendship (I know this resembles sexual harassment but trust me he's just my friend). I would also like to thank Dr. Kathleen Szick. Kathy has really helped me stay focused and harassed me just enough to get this project completed. I cannot say enough about all her warmth and caring, not just for me but for everyone. Thanks Kathy, I love you. I must thank my family for their continued support ' (both■financial and mental) . Grandma Rosie, thank you for all my school books and continued belief in my abilities.; , To my mother, ■thank you for the years of sacrifice, without your continued love and support I don't think I would have come this far, I owe you everything. VI TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT. \ . , . ., . iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . , . .v CHAPTER ONE INTRdDUCTION. • . , . .1 Life-HistorY- : - • r i • • • .• • • -3 Txade-Offs/i . , . • • . • -S . Natural. Selection/Adaptation/Constraints. ,. 14 Allometrie Growth. .. ■ . .17 Morphology . ■. : . .20 Relative Gut Length. , . .; . .23 Study Organism . ^ . .26 FOCUS OF CURRENT RESEARCH . .. .29 CHAPTER TWO . INTRODUCTION . ... , . .: . y. ; . .31 MATERIALS AND METHODS . .1. - • • ■ . ,. .. -31 Collection Sites. ■ ■■ .. ■. - -37 Characterization of the Life-History Phenot}p)e.38 Volumetric Measurements . A . .38 Digitized Measurements: . .40 Statistical Analysis. .. : . .40 Vll RESULTS'- . .V; / y V ^ , - .v . .A1 Preliminary Trials of Vplumetric Measurements . 41 Life History Characteristics. - . 42 Morphological Analyses. ; . • • • . , 43 Whole Body Volumes . • • • • • -43. Reproduction, Gut, and Internal Cavity Volumes.4:4, Gut Length and Relative Gut Lengfh. :. .47 Reproductive Female Somatic Weight. , . .47 DISCUSSION -7 • • - '.v i -48 Life History .' ■ . 48 Volumetric Measurements . • • . .. .51 Whole Body Volumes. - • . • • • • . 53 Gut Morphology. :. ■ '11 .:. y, .■ . 54 Female Somatic Lean Weight. .. 56 CONCLUSION. - - • • • • • • - : • ^ • • . 57 APPENDIX A: Tables, and Graphg , . , .59 Table 1: Volumetric Measurments. .. .60 Table 2: Life-History Trait Means. .. .. .. i . .61 Table 3: ANCOVAs of Life-History Traits. .62 Table 4: Morphological Means and ANCOVAs. 63 Table 5: Reproductive, Gut, and Cavity Volume Means.64 Figure 1: Whole Body vs. Standard Length. 65 Vlll Figure 2: Body Weight vs. Standard Length .66 Figure 3a: High Predation Sum of Components. .61 Figure 3b: Low Predation Sum of Components. 68 Figure 4: Cavity Volume vs. Standard Length 69 Figure 5: Intestine Length vs. Standard Length. 70 APPENDIX B: SAS General Linear Models. - 71 APPENDIX C: SAS General Linear Model Procedure Outputs . 75 REFERENCES CITED. .. .83 IX CHAPTER ONE TNTRODUCjlON An understanding of life-history is fundamental to understanding the basic biology of an organism. Yet, this seemingly simple task of describing such basic biology is surprisingly complex. Life-history description and analysis is the study of an organism's lifetime pattern of growth, differentiation, storage and reproduction, all of which ultimately contribute to propagation (Begon et al. 1990). Life-history traits of a species are believed to be the result of natural selection. The combination of life- history characteristics represent a "strategy" for maximizing reproductive potential in a given environment. The principle life-history traits include size at birth, growth pattern, age at maturity, size at maturity, number of offspring, size of offspring, sex of offspring, and age- and size-specific reproductive investments (Stearns 1992). Changes in any one of the life-history parameters usually come at the expense of one of the other parameters. Such "trade-offs" are ultimately the result of a physiological constraint or cost. optimal body size models have been explored which state that optimum body size of an animal should be directly related to the availability of its resources (Schoener 1969; Case 1978). Case (1978) states that an animal's size represents an evolutionary compromise between maximizing immediate reproductive effort and allocating assimilated energy in growth to increase survivorship and future reproductive succes. Cheong et al. (1984) demonstrated a positive size-fecundity relationship in natural populations of Least Killifish {Heterandria formosa) females. Cheong et al. (1984) suggest that Heterandria is food limited in its natural environment and that larger females are better able to compete and acquire food to allocate to their growth, maintenance, and, ultimately, to nourishment of developing embryos. Guppy {Poecilia reticulata) life-history characteristics investigated to date include number and size of offspring, reproductive allotment (% of body weight,that consists