Citation

Material Information

Title:
How did Rainbow Smelt invade the Great Lakes? - Testing Bergstedt’s 1983 multiple introduction hypothesis and it’s potential role in rapid adaptation

Notes

Abstract:
Some invasive species rapidly adapt to novel environments despite the associated founder effects during the initial colonization phase. Such adaptation is possible if sufficient genetic variation is generated (e.g., via multiple introductions). In the Great Lakes, Rainbow Smelt (Osmerus mordax) originally invaded Lake Michigan following unintended migration from a stocked population in Crystal Lake. The remaining Great Lakes were subsequently colonized in a relatively sequential order; however, Lake Ontario may have been established by an anadromous strain originally stocked into the Finger Lakes. This invasion provides a natural experiment to test if multiple introductions occurred and if so, to investigate the potential evolution of different ecotypes. Here, we genotyped Rainbow Smelt from Lake Superior (n=18), Lake Michigan (n=24), Lake Huron (n=21), Lake Erie (n=24), and Lake Ontario (n=43) at 13,486 loci. Preliminary results suggest that both Lake Erie and Lake Ontario were from a second, independent introduction given that pairwise Fst estimates to the three remaining Great Lakes ranged 0.05 to 0.06. Future work will focus on identifying outlier loci to better characterize hybridization between the two introductions.
Acquisition:
Collected for SUNY Oswego Institutional Repository by the online self-submittal tool. Submitted by Nicholas Sard.

Record Information

Source Institution:
SUNY Oswego Institutional Repository
Holding Location:
SUNY Oswego Institution
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

How did rainbow smelt invade the Great Lakes? Testing Bergstedt’s 1983 multipleintroduction hypothesisNick Sard1, Yue Shi2, Brian Weidel3, and Wes Larson21 Biological Sciences Department, SUNY Oswego, Oswego, New York 2 Wisconsin Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, College of Natural Resources, University of Wisconsin Stevens Point, Stevens Po int, Wisconsin 3 United States Geological Survey, Great Lakes Science Center, Lake Ontario Biological Station, Oswego NY, 13126Background•Some invasive species rapidly adapt to novel environments despite associated founder effects during the initial colonization phase.1•P ossible if sufficient genetic variation is generated (e.g., via multiple introductions ).2•In the Great Lakes, rainbow s melt (Osmerus mordax ) originally invaded Lake Michigan following unintended migration from a stocked population in Crystal Lake.•R emaining Great Lakes were subsequently colonized in a r elatively sequential order.3•First observation of r ainbow smelt in Lake Ontario was six years prior to that of Lake Erie.•Lake Ontario may have been established by an anadromous strain originally stocked into the Finger Lakes.4•Evidence for the rapid evolution of distinct, semelparous and iteroparous, rainbow smelt ecotypes in Canadian lakes.5•This invasion provides a natural experiment to test if multiple introductions occurred and if so, to investigate the potential evolution of different ecotypes.Objectives•Determine if Lake Ontario was founded independently from the upper Great Lakes.•Test for outlier loci that may be associated with adaption.General methods•Extracted and normalized DNAs from rainbow smelt collected from Lake Superior (n=18), Lake Michigan (n=24), Lake Huron (n=21), Lake Erie (n=24), and Lake Ontario (n=43).•Prepared restrictionsite associated DNA libraries.6•Sequenced libraries on a HiSeqX and data processed with STACKS.7•A total of 13,186 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped.•SNPs were used to characterize genomic variation within and among collections.•Within – estimated heterozygosity, private sites, segregating sites, and FIS.•Among – estimated pairwise FST,principle components analysis (PCA).Preliminary results1) Genetic variation in collections supports the multiple-introduction hypothesis for Lake Ontario•Expected heterozygosity among all collections were similar.•Lake Ontario had the highest number of private sites.•Negative FISin Lakes Ontario and Erie may indicate outbreeding.Future work•Perform a meristic and geometric morphometric analysis of rainbow smelt heads collected from Lake Ontario.•Create a genotyping by sequencing panel to genotype more rainbow smelt from within Lake Ontario.•Map loci against the E uropean s melt g enome.References1.Roman, J. and Darling, J.A., 2007. Paradox lost: genetic diversity and the success of aquatic invasions. Trends in ecology & evolution, 22(9), pp.454 -464.2.Brown, J.E. and Stepien, C.A., 2009. Invasion genetics of the Eurasian round goby in North America: tracing sources and spread patterns. Molecular Ecology , 18(1), pp.64 -79.3.Emery, L. 1985. Review of fish introduced into the Great Lakes, 1819 -1974. Great Lakes Fishery Commission Technical Report, volume 45.4.Bergstedt , R.A., 1983. Origins of rainbow smelt in Lake Ontario. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 9 (4), pp.582 -583.5.Saint -Laurent, R., Legault , M. and Bernatchez , L., 2003. Divergent selection maintains adaptive differentiation despite high gene flow between sympatric rainbow smelt ecotypes ( Osmerus mordax Mitchill ). Molecular Ecology , 12(2), pp.315-330.6.Ali, O.A., O’Rourke, S.M., Amish, S.J., Meek, M.H., Luikart , G., Jeffres , C. and Miller, M.R., 2016. RAD capture (Rapture): flexible and efficient sequence -based genotyping. Genetics , 202(2), pp.389 -400.7.Catchen , J., Hohenlohe, P.A., Bassham , S., Amores , A. and Cresko , W.A., 2013. Stacks: an analysis tool set for population genomics. Molecular ecology , 22(11), pp.3124-3140. AcknowledgementsWe thank Tim O’Brian, USGS, for collecting rainbow smelt tissue samples from Lake Huron. We also thank Chelsea May , OMNRF, for collecting tissue samples from Lake Erie. Finally, SUNY Oswego’s Faculty Scholarly and Creative Activity Grant for funding the library preparations for this project.2) Pairwise estimates of genetic differentiation suggest Lakes Ontario and Erie are distinct from other Great Lakes•Comparisons among Lakes Superior, Michigan, and Huron suggested genetic differentiation was small (01%).•Lakes Ontario and Erie were 56% different from the other Great Lakes.3) Multivariate statistics corroborate results based on population genetics theory•PC1 clearly separated Lake Ontario and Lake Erie from Lakes Superior, Michigan, and Huron.•PC2 separated Lake Superior from Lakes Huron and Michigan.Table 1. Summary statistics describing genetic variation observed in rainbow smelt within each Great Lake. Figure 3 . Principle Components Analysis using 13,186 SNPs genotyped in rainbow smelt collected from all five Great Lakes. Figure 2 . Pairwise FSTestimates among Great Lakes collections of rainbow smelt. Figure 4 . Principle Components Analysis of 13,186 SNPs genotyped in rainbow smelt collected from Lakes Ontario and Erie. Want to learn more? Check out my websiteCorresponding author: n icholas.sard@oswego.edu Lake HepS S F IS Ontario 0.244 73 11835 0.03 Erie 0.249 32 11455 0.02 Huron 0.236 13 11086 0.00 Michigan 0.232 22 11245 0.00 Superior 0.233 52 10539 0.00 He– expected heterozygosity; pS – number of private sites; S – number of segregating sites; and FIS– Wright’s inbreeding coefficient4) Most samples from Lakes Ontario and Erie cluster together•PCA of just Lake Ontario and Lake Erie samples indicated a few Lake Ontario individuals were different. Figure 1 . Map of first sightings of rainbow smelt in each Great Lake.